Why Bitcoin and Not a better improved crypto?

[achimsmile]

What gave you the impression that every altcoin is a bitcoin copy?

Perhaps the fact that, some small technicalities aside, they all are?

Damn I want to give back my Ferrari now, it's just a copy of the Ford model T.

The differences between a Ferrari and a Ford Model T are:
1. not just some small technicalities
2. not something that current Ford owners could decide to instantly implement in their cars as well, free of charge

There is nothing that altcoins do or have, that Bitcoin couldn't do or have as well if we all want to.

1. The same is the case if you compare bitcoin to some altcoins.
2. Too many if's. User opinions differ. In the end, the foundation and devs decide. Look at the 20MB fork issue. This kind of stuff is slowing down technological advancement.
If the world was perfect and everyone was in unison, then yes, Bitcoin could adopt all new tech. But I'm sure I'll never see the day when Bitcoin implements Proof of Stake for example, since many bitcoiners are PoW maximalists.

[Kazimir]

I think also so. And I'm waiting anxiously for the day when we can pay all our bills using Bitcoins.

You seem to gonna live forever...

I can already pay the majority of all my daily expenses in Bitcoin. That includes my phone and internet bill, shopping, daily groceries, and later this year I will even be paying my rent in Bitcoin. Holiday, or a night out: Bitcoin.

Only three hurdles remaining are tax, public transport, and health insurance.

[Kazimir]

The differences between a Ferrari and a Ford Model T are:
1. not just some small technicalities
2. not something that current Ford owners could decide to instantly implement in their cars as well, free of charge

There is nothing that altcoins do or have, that Bitcoin couldn't do or have as well if we all want to.

1. The same is the case if you compare bitcoin to some altcoins.

Not quite, THE most important advantage of Bitcoin over any altcoin is the huge leap ahead in market size, acceptance, recognition, branding, user base, everything. That's not some technicality that developers could decide to enable or include, recompile, release an update, and there it is. This takes years to grow, and Bitcoin has done this unlike any other altcoin.

2. Too many if's. User opinions differ. In the end, the foundation and devs decide. Look at the 20MB fork issue. This kind of stuff is slowing down technological advancement.

Sure, you need some form of consensus. Is there any in altcoins?

Oh and just to address a huge misunderstanding: the foundation decides exactly NOTHING. They're a group of lobbyists trying to promote Bitcoin, which is great, but they have no more saying in Bitcoin's development than any other user.

If the world was perfect and everyone was in unison, then yes, Bitcoin could adopt all new tech. But I'm sure I'll never see the day when Bitcoin implements Proof of Stake for example, since many bitcoiners are PoW maximalists.

Does the majority of Bitcoin users think that PoS is better than PoW? I doubt it (I, for example, don't) and thus, it shouldn't be implemented in Bitcoin.

[achimsmile]

Not quite, THE most important advantage of Bitcoin over any altcoin is the huge leap ahead in market size, acceptance, recognition, branding, user base, everything. That's not some technicality that developers could decide to enable or include, recompile, release an update, and there it is. This takes years to grow, and Bitcoin has done this unlike any other altcoin.

Your original statement was that all altcoins are, apart from small technicalities, a copy of bitcoin. Some of them are not. I agree with what you say now, but this was not your point.

Does the majority of Bitcoin users think that PoS is better than PoW? I doubt it (I, for example, don't) and thus, it shouldn't be implemented in Bitcoin.

I hoped you'd say that. That's excatly the reason why bitcoin will not change much.

Please answer me this: If in an utopian world, there existed a PoS system that was able to reach fully decentralized consensus, and was not susceptible to attacks (like stake grinding /N@S), and had a good enough distribution, what would speak against a switch to PoS?

Would it not save a shitload of electricity being converted to heat? Would it not decentralize the block generation process, that is now in the hand of 4 mining pools (>51%)

hint: I'm convinced that this utopian PoS system already exists (not speaking about one coin specifically)


In the end, maybe Come-from-Beyond is right. Most people don't care about technical features, concepts like decentralization, block confirmation time and stuff. They just want to send or exchange money fast, or store it in a bank for convenience. Sadly this is why the world could just end up using ripple.

[SargeR33]

The problem is there are hundreds of other alts, yet none of them offer anything different to bitcoin. Sure some can be staked, some offer POS only but there is no innovation. Its just bitcoin, with a different algo more often than not.

[Come-from-Beyond]

The problem is there are hundreds of other alts, yet none of them offer anything different to bitcoin. Sure some can be staked, some offer POS only but there is no innovation. Its just bitcoin, with a different algo more often than not.

Show me Bitcoin decentralized asset exchange then.

[SargeR33]

The problem is there are hundreds of other alts, yet none of them offer anything different to bitcoin. Sure some can be staked, some offer POS only but there is no innovation. Its just bitcoin, with a different algo more often than not.

Show me Bitcoin decentralized asset exchange then.

What does that even mean? Which alt offers that? That isn't ground breaking either. Bitcoin is code. Anything you can code can be done with bitcoin.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Anything you can code can be done with bitcoin.

Good, so we don't have Bitcoin decentralized asset exchange simply because noone needs it?

[SargeR33]

Anything you can code can be done with bitcoin.

Good, so we don't have Bitcoin decentralized asset exchange simply because noone needs it?

Honestly I have no idea what you're on about.

[WhatTheGox]

I think that a new crypto will be developed and people will use it rather than bitcoin.

So far though.. Altcoins have been complete failures.

You can build anything you need onto bitcoin network.  How can you really improve on bitcoin?

[picolo]

I think that a new crypto will be developed and people will use it rather than bitcoin.

So far though.. Altcoins have been complete failures.

Your last sentence shows you know that altcoins had little success.

Coinbase's CEO disagrees with your first statement : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=966084.new#new

[R2D221]

Each one we have seen with better technologies have so far failed

Failed at replacing bitcoin? This process takes quite some time. Let's wait 20 years and we'll see.
Either bitcoin tech advances faster (which I hope, but doubt), or it will be replaced.

Imagine you wouldn't know cryptos and someone asked you for a choice. Would you use coin A with slow confirmaton times, bloated blockchain and controlled by big mining companies, or would you use a fast, slick, fully decentralized coin B with a lot more features.

Yes, the network effect is in favour of bitcoin, but if we assume that most crypto users are rational (may be too much to assume?), there will be a shift sooner or later.

If everyone chose coin B, then coin B would be bloated and controlled by big mining companies. As simple as that.

[Ingatqhvq]

Bitcoin is not perfect.
We can expect better cryptocurrence.

[achimsmile]

Each one we have seen with better technologies have so far failed

Failed at replacing bitcoin? This process takes quite some time. Let's wait 20 years and we'll see.
Either bitcoin tech advances faster (which I hope, but doubt), or it will be replaced.

Imagine you wouldn't know cryptos and someone asked you for a choice. Would you use coin A with slow confirmaton times, bloated blockchain and controlled by big mining companies, or would you use a fast, slick, fully decentralized coin B with a lot more features.

Yes, the network effect is in favour of bitcoin, but if we assume that most crypto users are rational (may be too much to assume?), there will be a shift sooner or later.

If everyone chose coin B, then coin B would be bloated and controlled by big mining companies. As simple as that.

not if coin B is proof of stake and allows for blockchain pruning

[Come-from-Beyond]

Coinbase's CEO disagrees with your first statement : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=966084.new#new

And Coinbase's CEO opinion matters because ...

Because what?

[R2D221]

Each one we have seen with better technologies have so far failed

Failed at replacing bitcoin? This process takes quite some time. Let's wait 20 years and we'll see.
Either bitcoin tech advances faster (which I hope, but doubt), or it will be replaced.

Imagine you wouldn't know cryptos and someone asked you for a choice. Would you use coin A with slow confirmaton times, bloated blockchain and controlled by big mining companies, or would you use a fast, slick, fully decentralized coin B with a lot more features.

Yes, the network effect is in favour of bitcoin, but if we assume that most crypto users are rational (may be too much to assume?), there will be a shift sooner or later.

If everyone chose coin B, then coin B would be bloated and controlled by big mining companies. As simple as that.

not if coin B is proof of stake and allows for blockchain pruning

Blockchain pruning doesn't magically disappear transactions. They still have to be stored somewhere. And Bitcoin is implementing it already.

Proof of Stake... still needs a computation to be done, right? There would be server farms doing that computation, whether you like it or not.

[uki]

The problem is there are hundreds of other alts, yet none of them offer anything different to bitcoin. Sure some can be staked, some offer POS only but there is no innovation. Its just bitcoin, with a different algo more often than not.

There is quite a lot of alts that differ significantly from bitcoin and do have something interesting behind. The main problem is that Bitcoin was first, and thus, there were no expectations about proving whether various concept work or make sense. Just an experiment that ended successfully. Now however, all altcoins are required (from the user-side) to pass numerous tests (some of them being utterly unnecessary), before they can distinguish themselves from a pure PnD clone. And some of them do indeed pass them. Too early to call, whether Bitcoin 2.0 is already among them, but I am sure sooner or later it will appear.

[Madness]

Unless someone come with a total new idea like Satoshi did , any Alternative coin will be a total failure .
They are basically all cheap copies and Bitcoin is unique and original . that simple

~ Madness

[Kazimir]

Bitcoin is not perfect.
We can expect better cryptocurrence.

Actually, we can expect Bitcoin to become better. It's not finished yet.

[Kazimir]

Good, so we don't have Bitcoin decentralized asset exchange simply because noone needs it?

We don't have that yet, because nobody created one yet. But this has nothing to with any supposed shortcoming of Bitcoin or any other altcoin, it's just something that can (and will) be created independently. So I kinda miss the point here?
 

Coinbase's CEO disagrees with your first statement : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=966084.new#new

And Coinbase's CEO opinion matters because ...
 
Because what?

Because it's true. Not because he's the CEO of whatever, but because of the content of his message. Don't shoot the messenger.
 
 

There is quite a lot of alts that differ significantly from bitcoin and do have something interesting behind.

Such as? I've seen a few interesting modifications from the original Bitcoin (things that can also be integrated into Bitcoin, by the way) but absolutely nothing spectacular that I would consider a technological breakthrough or "the next big thing" (like Bitcoin is to fiat).

The only development in this direction is Ethereum, and it isn't even live yet.