Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Are Altcoins Undermining Bitcoin's Credibility?

samzenpus posted about 2 months ago | from the least-of-your-worries dept.

Bitcoin 267

An anonymous reader writes The editor of a Bitcoin advocacy site believes the proliferation of altcoins (cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin) is harming Bitcoin's long-term potential as an alternative to traditional currencies. Posting at BadBitcoin.org, a site that seeks to expose online scams that target Bitcoin users, the pseudonymous ViK compares altcoins, including the Internet meme inspired Dogecoin, to a pump-and-dump scheme where developers create their own version of the Bitcoin wallet and blockchain and then "pre-mine" or generate a significant number of cryptocurrency units before the altcoin's official release. Later, when their value has risen, the pre-mined altcoins are exchanged for Bitcoin or in some cases converted directly to cash. While critics of cryptocurrencies in general might find ViK's comments about the altcoin "tulip" mania ironic, the self-confessed Bitcoin fan is nevertheless calling for an altcoin boycott: "The easiest way to stop them is to not participate. We all know that they only have one purpose, and that is to make Bitcoin for the so called developers."

cancel ×

267 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Self Serving Story? (2)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 months ago | (#47690767)

I'm not really a fan of any "altcurrency", but this guy just comes of sounding whiney and self-serving.

Re:Self Serving Story? (4, Interesting)

WarJolt (990309) | about 2 months ago | (#47691011)

I just don't agree with him. Bitcoins have some serious issues. If someone develops a digital currency that addresses those issues and makes them more practical for every day use I support it. If I had to wait for 10 minutes to get my starbucks coffee paid for I'd probably decide to just pay cash. I also wonder how quickly the blockchain would grow if bitcoin became more mainstream. Anonymity is also an issue. I think competition between digital currencies will only make them more practical and robust. That can only be a good thing for digital currencies in the long run. If progress is not made digital currencies will never replace conventional ones.

Re:Self Serving Story? (2)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | about 2 months ago | (#47691295)

Well, you COULD create an altcoin where instead of 10 minutes to the new block, you have it down to 10 seconds. But then submitted stale shares are substantial, no one wants to mine, and the network doesn't have the computational support it needs. Every altcoin is based on bitcoin, with parameters/hash method just changed. All of it have advantages and drawbacks depending on how far from one side to the other you tweak those values. Overcoming these will need a totally new idea

Re:Self Serving Story? (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 2 months ago | (#47691377)

If someone develops a digital currency that addresses those issues and makes them more practical for every day use I support it.

Exactly. The Bitcoin high priests have already chased off the Zerocoin folks, so their future is far from guaranteed. secp256k1 also looks like it wasn't the best choice.

The blockchain idea is a good one, and will probably outlast bitcoin itself. But middlemen are also needed for any of these systems to handle transactions and arbitrage efficiently.

The OP isn't wrong, though - the trendy altcoins are all doomed too.

Re:Self Serving Story? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691023)

I bet he dumped a lot of money into bitcoin with hopes of becoming rich quickly. Since this has not happened, now he's blaming altcoins with the hope that a discontinued use of altcoins will get him rich quickly.

tl;dr The author is a gullible moron.

Re:Self Serving Story? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691035)

funny how quickly the free-market entrepreneurs become control freaks

Bitcoin credibility? (2, Insightful)

DogDude (805747) | about 2 months ago | (#47690787)

Bitcoin has about as much credibility as Monopoly money in my mind. Asking if something can undermine the credibility of monopoly money doesn't really make any sense.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (4, Funny)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 2 months ago | (#47690803)

You're just miffed because I have a hotel on Park Place and three houses on Boardwalk.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690869)

dO nOt PaSs Go

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (3, Informative)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 2 months ago | (#47690953)

You're just miffed because I have a hotel on Park Place and three houses on Boardwalk.

That is a violation of the rules. Houses and hotels must be as evenly distributed as possible across properties of the same group. So it is legal to have a hotel on Park Place, and four houses on Boardwalk, or four houses on each, or four on one and three on the other. But it is NOT legal to have three houses on one and a hotel on the other. Here are the official rules [wikibooks.org] .

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691005)

Just like a citizen arguing with the government - You forgot they have secret houserules that makes ok for them to do as they do. pointing to the official rules is pointless.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (3, Insightful)

mcrbids (148650) | about 2 months ago | (#47691115)

not to mention that he's doing it wrong: you put your hotel on Boardwalk first, since you get the most money AND the most likely landing there thanks to the "Advance token to boardwalk" cards.

But they aren't the best investment anyway; you'd do better putting your hotels on Orange, then Red/Yellow, then Light Blue... [businessinsider.com]

Tsk, tsk....

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (4, Funny)

Kjella (173770) | about 2 months ago | (#47691147)

I hereby award you the Hermes Conrad award for meticulous technical correctness. It may be collected at the Central Bureaucracy upon reception of a properly filled out, signed, stamped and notarized Award Reception form.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

swilly (24960) | about 2 months ago | (#47691229)

Make sure that form is stamped five times, otherwise the head bureaucrat will summon the guards to bring him the form to fill out to have you taken away.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (3, Interesting)

AthanasiusKircher (1333179) | about 2 months ago | (#47691365)

Make sure that form is stamped five times, otherwise the head bureaucrat will summon the guards to bring him the form to fill out to have you taken away.

In Soviet Russia, five stamps summon... oh, forget it.

Actually, I interrupt this Slashdot joke to point out that the number five actually plays a significant role in old Soviet Russia bureaucracy jokes. Quoth Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] :

The genitive plural of a noun (used with a numeral to indicate five or more of something, as opposed to the dual, used for two, three, or four, see Russian nouns) is a rather unpredictable form of the Russian noun, and there are a handful of words which even native speakers have trouble producing this form of (either due to rarity or an actual lexical gap). A common example of this is kocherga (fireplace poker). The joke is set in a Soviet factory. Five pokers are to be requisitioned. The correct forms are acquired, but as they are being filled out, a debate arises: what is the genitive plural of kocherga? Is it Kocherg? Kocherieg? Kochergov?... One thing is clear: a form with the wrong genitive plural of kocherga will bring disaster from the typically pedantic bureaucrats. Finally, an old janitor overhears the commotion, and tells them to send in two separate requisitions: one for two kochergi and another for three kochergi. In some versions, they send in a request for 4 kochergi and one extra to find out the correct word, only to receive back "here are your 4 kochergi and one extra." A similar story by Mikhail Zoshchenko involves yet another answer: after great care and multiple drafts to get the genitive case correct, including the substitution of "five ÑÑÑfÐ (pieces)" for "five pokers", the response comes back: the warehouse has no kocherezhek.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

Livius (318358) | about 2 months ago | (#47691197)

Just like in real life, there are no rules for the person with that kind of money.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

Jmstuckman (561420) | about 2 months ago | (#47691307)

According to the official "short game" rules, you may, indeed, build hotels after your third house.

Here are the real official rules [hasbro.com] .

Re: Bitcoin credibility? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691393)

Now you liberals want to add regulations to monopoly too?!

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691043)

You're just miffed because I have a hotel on Park Place and three houses on Boardwalk.

Then you're cheating; the rules [wikibooks.org] require players to build and sell improvements evenly. You'd either have four houses on Park Place and three houses on Boardwalk, or a hotel on Park Place and four houses on Boardwalk.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690843)

Imagine a cryptocurrency where you had to tell someone your private key to send them money. That'd be dumb, yet thats what using a credit card is. I am sure from your comment you have never tried using bitcoin or given it much thought.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (3, Interesting)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 2 months ago | (#47690949)

Clearly Bitcoin has enough credibility for people to value it at hundreds of dollars. You may not think much of it, but as long as there are people willing to exchange it for traditional currency or goods and services that's enough to keep it viable.

The attraction of altcoins is that people who got in early on Bitcoin are not rich, simply because they mined vast quantities of it when mining was easy. People who missed the gold rush now see altcoins as offering a second chance. The only problem is that there are so many and most will fail, so you have to pick the right one AND get in very early with significant mining power (initial outlay).

Actually it gets worse because most altcoins were designed to be ASIC-proof, but now ASICs are appearing to mine them anyway so there is yet more expense to stay competitive.

Re: Bitcoin credibility? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690995)

Is there somewhere I can find a bitcoin to Pog to Beanie Baby to Tulip conversion chart?

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0)

blue trane (110704) | about 2 months ago | (#47691159)

Cryptocurrencies in their current incarnation are so stupid because they suck power needlessly, to create something of psychological value only because it is scarce. They are increasing scarcity of power, to create a psychological unit assigned a psychological value because it is scarce. It doesn't make sense, not economically, physically, scientifically.

The only way bitcoin makes sense is psychologically, and the psychology is a sociopathic, "I got mine Jack keep your hands off my stack" pathology. It is creating a number and calling it valuable, and taking up energy for this psychological money creation exercise.

It would be a little better if they were actually advancing knowledge with their mining operations. Make it like SETI@home, have it do some processing that helps us know more about the universe.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691165)

What does this even mean? Asic proof?

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (4, Insightful)

AthanasiusKircher (1333179) | about 2 months ago | (#47691265)

Clearly Bitcoin has enough credibility for people to value it at hundreds of dollars.

No -- clearly Bitcoin has enough potential for people to value it at hundreds of dollars.

There's a difference. The price of Bitcoin was driven up in the past couple years mostly on the basis of what it might become, not so much what it already is. That's not "credibility" as a currency -- that's potential value as a speculative investment.

You may not think much of it, but as long as there are people willing to exchange it for traditional currency or goods and services that's enough to keep it viable.

Again, that's not why it has most of the value it has today. Most of the growth has been because there have been people willing to exchange traditional currency for it, not the other way around.

Currencies can get their value from at least three components: (1) "inherent" ulility value of the basic material, (2) utility value of the currency as a medium of exchange, and (3) speculation due to investors and people happy to buy the currency because they think other people will ultimately need the currency for reasons (1) and/or (2).

Paper dollars, for example, have almost no value of type (1), but they have a lot of type (2), and the U.S. dollar is popular enough around the world that lots of people view it as a safe enough investment for (3), which keeps its value higher than if it were only the internal currency of the U.S. Gold has some value of type (1) (i.e., applications requiring its properties, like jewelry and applications which use its conductivity and resistance to corrosion), and it functions in limited capacity in (2), but most of the increase in gold's value in recent years has come from (3).

Now take Bitcoin. It has absolutely NONE of (1). Until relatively recently, it had extremely few everyday applications where it could be used for (2), and still there are significant problems to be overcome which will make it easy for average people to deal directly in it as a currency in safe and secure fashion. So the VAST majority (maybe 99% or more) of Bitcoin's value is about (3) -- random speculation as an investment, effectively gambling on the idea that it will eventually become widely adopted.

That's not "credibility" -- yet. Maybe someday every Bitcoin early adopter's dream will come true, and it will pay off and that value will convert from (3) to (2). But I'm not gonna hold my breath, and I'm certainly not going to go out and buy virtual "money" whose value is currently mostly held up by a small number of investors. Say what you will about the "fiat" nature of the dollar or whatever, but you have hundreds of millions of people worldwide that depend on that value everyday, and they all have an interest in keeping it afloat. Bitcoin? I have no idea who holds most of the value, but I know it's concentrated in a much smaller group of people, and I have no reason to think that they won't dump and run screaming if trust in the "magic money" dies next week.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690967)

Is there a currency which you feel is credible? If so, what do you feel makes it so? There are no wrong answers although anything related to "popularity" is a bit of a dumb answer as that affects availability, not credibility.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690999)

Gold and perhaps silver are credible currencies.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47691065)

Why? Because they're rare? So what?

If you now try the "because of their unique physical properties" gambit, I'd put more credibility into copper, lithium and magnesium...

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691155)

gold and silver are both in a limited enough supply to be manipulated by speculators

that is why no responsible currency is based on it any more

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

ultranova (717540) | about 2 months ago | (#47691267)

Gold and perhaps silver are credible currencies.

Well, no, because I have no convenient way of checking either the purity nor mass of any gold I might get, and a metal-backed currency can stop being so at any time. On top of that, gold is soft enough for wear being a problem, but still too hard to cut pieces off as needed, so we'd be stuck with precut gold pieces (coins) which can't be actually trusted to carry their nominal value due to wear and theft.

On a purely technical level, without getting into any economics or ideology, gold makes for a horrible currency.

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 months ago | (#47691153)

bitcoins only have value as long as they are convertible to dollars and euros. they can cease to have any value in a very short time. they aren not accepted in most places while dollars and euros are

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691119)

really? the fact that you can spend it at real stores and get real product doesn't mean anything to you?

Re:Bitcoin credibility? (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 2 months ago | (#47691425)

Please name a currency that you find credible.

Throwing the baby out ? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690793)

While there are some pump & dump operators out there, not all altcoins are bad

Saying that all altcoins are bad is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater

If all altcoins are bad, bitcoin will be bad as well, after all, what is bitcoin without the number crunching - just like all the other altcoins ?

Announcing ICoin! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690797)

There is exactly one ICoin and it is infinitesimally subdivided by typing the letter "i" into a plain ASCII text file. The value of a single 'i" is 1/(total number of "i"s ever typed).

Enjoy!

how meany people are useing Bitcoin just to play t (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 months ago | (#47690811)

how meany people are useing Bitcoin just to play the market like stocks?

Re:how meany people are useing Bitcoin just to pla (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 2 months ago | (#47690879)

How many people are using their savings just to play the market like stocks?!

Re:how meany people are useing Bitcoin just to pla (1)

dugancent (2616577) | about 2 months ago | (#47691131)

No one, unless they are buying stocks.

It's all funny money... (5, Insightful)

pubwvj (1045960) | about 2 months ago | (#47690817)

All of this is funny money.

Bitcoins are just in your imagination.
USDollars are merely imagined by the USGovernment.
Gold has no real value other than using it for things like electrical contacts, etc.
None of this is real money.
If you want real value, get a basket of eggs, hatch the chicks, raise them up, feed them pasture, your other asset - you are landed I hope - and they'll lay more eggs. Now you're in business and can feed yourself. When you succeed at that start feeding other people and they'll give you something of real value like a pork chop or firewood to stay warm with. What ever you do, don't accept cash, bitcoins, gold or other fraudulent currencies for your eggs. You want real value for your real things.

Re:It's all funny money... (3, Funny)

SpacePunk (17960) | about 2 months ago | (#47690857)

It's difficult to pay your electric bill with chickens, and hogs.

Re:It's all funny money... (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | about 2 months ago | (#47690997)

You make your electricity with a generator that burns the case you produce in your biomass digester. You put the chicken and hog shit in the digester.

Re:It's all funny money... (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 2 months ago | (#47691015)

It's difficult to pay your electric bill with chickens, and hogs.

True, but it will get you a hooker. (Until they closed the Chicken Ranch.)

Re:It's all funny money... (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 2 months ago | (#47691443)

I guess it depends on your definition of "hog".

Re:It's all funny money... (2)

magarity (164372) | about 2 months ago | (#47690883)

How many chickens did you trade for your computer?

Re:It's all funny money... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690897)

I traded someone a computer in return for fixing my car.

Re:It's all funny money... (5, Insightful)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 months ago | (#47690903)

USDollars are merely imagined by the USGovernment.

Oh they are "merely imagined" by a lot more than just the US Government. And that's why they have actual value.

Re:It's all funny money... (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47691091)

The value of the US dollar is a bit like a strapless evening dress on a 70 year old: Kept up by the collective willpower of everyone 'cause everyone fears the worst if it should drop for some reason.

Re:It's all funny money... (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 2 months ago | (#47691149)

Oh they are "merely imagined" by a lot more than just the US Government. And that's why they have actual value.

And that "imagining" of new FRN's is also why commodity producers around the world demand twice as many FRN's for their goods as they did a decade ago.

It's all funny money... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691169)

You are a fucking moron.

Re:It's all funny money... (1)

ultranova (717540) | about 2 months ago | (#47691341)

You want real value for your real things.

The problem, of course, is that they're your chickens and land only because people agree so. Property rights are no less imaginary than currency.

The truth of the matter is that "value" is an entirely made-up concept. A chicken has no property of being valuable; all value you ascribe to it is entirely in your own imagination. Which is of course what allows people to value things differently, thus making trade possible. So it's only appropriate that we use a made-up concept of currency as an abstract representation for the made-up concept of value - or economic value, to precise.

In other words, there is not - and cannot even in theory be - non-funny money. Value being subjective is the very heart of the concept of economy. And that means any imaginable way of measuring it is ultimately just make-believe.

Re:It's all funny money... (1)

BarbaraHudson (3785311) | about 2 months ago | (#47691361)

If you want real value, get a basket of eggs,

Putting all your eggs in one basket? You really ARE a contrarian investor, aren't you?

No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690819)

Some altcoins are actually interesting (eg huntercoin has a way to mine by playing a bomberman type game).

Re:No (1)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 2 months ago | (#47690841)

Some altcoins are actually interesting (eg huntercoin has a way to mine by playing a bomberman type game).

Geez. And I thought I was easily amused!

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690867)

You can get drunk while you play if you want.

Re:No (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47691099)

I turned to spirits for investment. I mean, where else do you get 20% and more for your money?

huh? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690833)

As opposed to bitcoin which totally isn't a pump and dump scheme?

it's all stupid (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690847)

Just makes the rich people in the world richer

like all investments in something unproven... (1)

silfen (3720385) | about 2 months ago | (#47690859)

Like all investments in something unproven, there is a lot of risk. And frequently, people who don't know what they are doing are making stupid bets. I don't see the problem.

Re:like all investments in something unproven... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690919)

Like all investments, there is a lot of risk. Fixed that for you.

Though if you're investing in "currency" you're doing it wrong.

There a war on (1, Interesting)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | about 2 months ago | (#47690871)

Bitcoin is a social movement dedicated to the elimination of central banks by providing a superior alternative.

This is obviously of concern to the entire class of people who derive unearned benefits via the operation of central banks. That class has an well-trained group of mercenaries that specialize in identifying, infiltrating, and disrupting social movements which threaten the profits of the ruling classes (see the transformation of Occupy the Fed into Occupy Wall Street into irrelevance) via well documented methods (see Snowden leaks, etc.)

Bitcoin is going to be attacked from every angle until such time until either it or central banks no longer exist.

Re: There a war on (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690889)

You should get a job

Re:There a war on (2)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 months ago | (#47690917)

...has an well-trained group of mercenaries that specialize in identifying, infiltrating, and disrupting social movements which threaten the profits of the ruling classes...

Here you go... [wikipedia.org]

Re:There a war on (0)

digsbo (1292334) | about 2 months ago | (#47690981)

Looks like you got modded "-1, disagree".

These downmodders are the same kinds of people who in 1900 thought the pound sterling would always be the world reserve currency.

Re:There a war on (0)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | about 2 months ago | (#47691467)

It's a fun way to be proved right.

They don't even bother pretending to hide what they are doing.

Re:There a war on (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691167)

Bitcoin is a social movement dedicated to the elimination of central banks by providing a superior alternative.

Shady backroom exchanges, absolutely zero protection for the consumer, complete lack of anonymity (yes, yes, Bitcoin isn't anonymous, but that's what the Bitcoin chucklefuck fanbois keep talking up), et cetera, et cetera.

There's literally no reason to use Bitcoin other than for shits and giggles. Superior alternative? It's inferior in every way.

Very amusing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690873)

Implying that Bitcoin has any credibility to begin with..

hilarious (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690877)

Anyone who supports any sort of crypto currency could say the same about bitcoin. Early adopters/(founders?) of bitcoin still control a huge number of bitcoin, so how is that not a pump and dump scheme itself?

I'm not a fan of crypto currencies at all.

Re:hilarious (4, Interesting)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 2 months ago | (#47690895)

When Bitcoin was launched, Satoshi had only been mining for a day or so. If you had been paying attention to the right forums, you could have started mining more or less at the same time he did and in fact some people (like Hal Finney) did exactly that.

What's more, Satoshi does not appear to have dumped his coins. Nor did he engage in much pumping. Indeed once people started hyperbolically talking about how Bitcoin would bring about world peace, trying to get Wikileaks to accept it and so on he retreated into the background and eventually left. His coins are still there.

Creating something new with no built in advantage for yourself, being totally honest about it, and then when its value soars not selling ..... is pretty much the opposite of a pump and dump scheme.

Re:hilarious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691031)

Being totally honest about it means not hiding behind an internet handle. You want me to trust you and your currency? I need to know who you are what your qualifications are.

Re:hilarious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691063)

I'm sure you can provide us with a list of people owning stock in the federal reserve.

Re:hilarious (1)

dugancent (2616577) | about 2 months ago | (#47691121)

1. The United States federal government.

That's good enough for me.

Re:hilarious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691271)

You don't even know what the fed is, but it's more trustworthy?

Protip: the federal reserve banks are not part of the government.

The Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the FTCA [the Federal Tort Claims Act], but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations."

Re:hilarious (1)

dugancent (2616577) | about 2 months ago | (#47691313)

I know that. You asked who the main investor was, not who it was owned by.

Re:hilarious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691343)

That was a different AC, but anyway do you have a source for your claim that the united states federal government is a stockholder in the federal reserve system? I do not think that is correct.

Re:hilarious (0)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 2 months ago | (#47691457)

I am teknohog. I only "pump and dump" women.

Re:hilarious (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | about 2 months ago | (#47691475)

Creating something new with no built in advantage for yourself, being totally honest about it, and then when its value soars not selling ..... is pretty much the opposite of a pump and dump scheme.

Well, then. We're clear on the fact that when the pump-and-dump operators took over, Satoshi retreated from the scene.

That doesn't change what bitcoin became rather quickly, and what is is now.

Kettle black (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690885)

This is like Britney Spears complaining that lady gaga is a non talent attention whore.

Re: Kettle black (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690937)

I'd hit that x2

...because they can. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690909)

People make these alternative currencies because they can. If Bitcoin is threatened by their mere existence, then it can't be a particularly good currency.

Re:...because they can. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47691127)

You think the USD would retain any credibility if everyone and their dog could legally start printing their own money?

Re:...because they can. (1)

dugancent (2616577) | about 2 months ago | (#47691259)

Sure. You can print/mint any currency you want, as long as it's not meant to pose as federal reserve currency. There is nothing illegal about it.

seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690911)

Bitcoin never had any credibility.

Is this a perfect example? (1)

bruce_the_loon (856617) | about 2 months ago | (#47690933)

Of Betteridge's Law?

No seems a perfectly fitting answer.

I don't have any altcoins (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47690939)

I don't have any altcoins. It's not that I hate them. I just. don't. care. If you think it's nothing more than a scheme to enrich the founders (and Bitcoin probably is too, I'm looking at you Satoshi or whatever your psedonym is), then don't participate. It really is that simple.

I've got a little physical silver and and greenbacks for the ZA or whatever. I don't have much use for eCurrency; but if others think differently, who am I to stop them? It doesn't seem to be harming the other currencies.

Hate to be the one to point this out... (5, Insightful)

cshark (673578) | about 2 months ago | (#47690965)

But they said the exact same thing about Linux distributions in the 90's, after the post Redhat influx of distros. What we learned from that experience, and some of us knew it at the time, was that the more people you have working in their own isolated environments, solving the problems that are important to them... the more innovation you have in the greater Linux space. It's the trickle down effect in open source software, and it's what makes a product or product ecosystem stronger. And we're seeing the same effect in the Bitcoin space. Just look at the proliferation of Scrypt variation, Gravity wells, different variations on proof of work, proof of stake, and others. Like Linux, Bitcoin is more than a bundle of software products, it's an entire ecosystem. To dismiss that, and say that there should only be about Bitcoin seriously misses the way open source innovation works. The rest is all marketing, which is bullshit by definition.

Re:Hate to be the one to point this out... (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 2 months ago | (#47691033)

I am sorry, but well written, reasoned, and logical posts about bitcoin are not allowed.

Re:Hate to be the one to point this out... (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 months ago | (#47691053)

actually linux only became strong after corporations put in features business wanted, and other corporation monetized it including ways to have vendor lock-in

Re:Hate to be the one to point this out... (0)

dugancent (2616577) | about 2 months ago | (#47691059)

The definition of marketing:

  noun
the action or business of promoting and selling products or services, including market research and advertising.

I don't see the word bullshit, or any synonym of it. Therefore it is not "by definition".

Re:Hate to be the one to point this out... (2)

somenickname (1270442) | about 2 months ago | (#47691373)

You aren't the only one that thinks that: http://www.coindesk.com/need-a... [coindesk.com] . A lot of the altcoins are definitely scams but, there is actually some legitimate work going on that is pretty interesting. Whether or not cryptocurrency ends up becoming mainstream or not is still unclear but, from a computer science standpoint, I think it's all pretty interesting. Maybe it's a fad that will go down in flames or maybe it will stabilize into something that benefits society. Either way, I've never understood all the /. hate for cryptocurrencies. It's a very nerdy and interesting modern development that no one has been forced to become involved with.

Bitcoin undermining itself just fine, thank-you (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691049)

Pump and dump is an IPO, massive failures of bitcoin companies, just another shady business practice. Everything old is new again when you don't know history.

UnderMINING Bitcoins? (1)

MindPrison (864299) | about 2 months ago | (#47691071)

...and here I thought they where MINING Bitcoins all the time...

LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691073)

Typical buttcoin libertard. The free market is awesome and perfect.... until it's not serving my personal benefit, in which case boycott the competition.

Yes and it's been a while (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 months ago | (#47691143)

From where I stand, I think the proliferation of altcoins have undermined Bitcoin since around december 2012, when the number of altcoins started to multiply at an insane rate. Even Litecoin, the main Bitcoin alternative, has lost more than half its value since then.

I'd worry. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691161)

Imagine other pump-and-dumps threatening the profits of your pump-and-dump!

Nah, Bitcoin destroyed their credibility when (1)

jeff4747 (256583) | about 2 months ago | (#47691187)

they designed a currency that assumes the world's population is constant.

Oh Boo Hoo (1)

real gumby (11516) | about 2 months ago | (#47691205)

Gosh, some advocates of a competing currency and libertarian fantasy are now cowed by competition? Say it ain’t so!

I’m rooting for some online cash to become viable, but don’t know if Bitcoin will be it (I suspect not since it has the same liquidity / shock issues as gold standards do) but let’s have a bunch of experiments and see what the market says.

It's developer jelaousy and bussiness envy. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691219)

enough said lol.

Bitcoin discredits itself (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47691253)

Lets see what bitcoin has brought us:

an industry surrounding the mass wasting of electricity.

assassin for hire websites
cryptolocker

these exist basically because bitcoin is designed to cater to them.

what are the pros?

anonymity? not really anymore at least not for the law abiding..

Stability is needed (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 2 months ago | (#47691417)

The programmers need to design a digital Bretton Woods system and enforce a stable exchange rate. For instance, the value of one eMark could be pegged at one five hundredth of a bitcoin, and the various central banks would be obligated to buy and sell bitcoins and emarks at that rate. That way, a miner wouldn't have to worry about backing the wrong computations.

Here's a dumb question... (1)

gwstuff (2067112) | about 2 months ago | (#47691479)

Why would the market not correct the inflated value of alt currencies, eventually? Aren't heavy fluctuation and scams a feature of immature markets? And doesn't outside interface inhibit correction?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?