Quote from: Melbustus on November 07, 2013, 08:51:29 PM

Quote from: Gabi on November 07, 2013, 08:33:46 PM

Support them if they propose something useful. Namecoin, a scrypt coin, a coin based on the prime algorithm, these are interesting. But a bitcoin clone whose difference is only a different name? lol

Agreed. The ones with meaningful technical distinctions contribute to making the crypto ecosystem better. Bitcoin shouldn't incorporate innovations without lots of testing and debate, so alts serve a very valuable experimentation function, even in the bitcoin-centric viewpoint.

I just wish alts that are effectively clones of bitcoin (ie, with just the mining alg, issuance curve, or block times changed) would die faster. To the crypto-ignorant masses, having hundreds of alts makes the whole crypto space seem silly.

Me too - not only do the bit-clones need to die, but every time a genuinely novel crypto comes along people get upset they didn't get on THAT bandwagon either so that gets cloned, and those clones need to die too. Bitcoin doesn't lose much to clones - it has a large enough community of developers, supporters, users etc. that it gets on fine. But beyond the initial buzz of a good idea alt-coins suffer because users and developers are spread across hundreds of similar, mostly pointless projects. If people could get behind a few decent altcoins such that they are developed constantly and well then it would serve not only as a good real-life testnet for new Bitcoin features (as well as an impetus for a community and a Foundation now reluctant to innovate), but might also create currencies that are vastly superior to Bitcoin, at least for certain purposes. There are many coins out there, based on truly revolutionary ideas, that are still maintained and developed by a single person, egged on by a couple of investors and casual enthusiasts on Bitcointalk. There are other coins, like FeatherCoin, which have established comparatively impressive communities, and yet appear to do absolutely nothing innovative whatsoever.

Quote from: Dansker on November 07, 2013, 08:35:16 PM

Only bitcoin.

Spreading mining power out will weaking bitcoin.

As the mining difficulty of Bitcoin grows, many miners will have to drop out anyway. Essentially, all alt-coins do is give miners a "second wind" to make a little more profit before winding down their operations, rather than providing a serious blow to Bitcoin's mining capacity.

Quote from: tonto on November 08, 2013, 05:43:58 PM

Namecoin is the only alt coin worth supporting. The others were created because their creators missed the money train with bitcoins and are hoping to create an artificial market and get rich.

This is certainly the case with a lot of them. Even with many of the ones that are based on genuinely good ideas, the creators often delude themselves that in virtue of that their chance has come to get rich quick. As a purely speculative investment, there really is no point investing in any other cryptocurrency (for the foreseeable future at least) - there is not going to be anything like the kind of booms Bitcoin has experienced (and may yet). But there is still some modest money to be made in some alt-coins (especially from mining), and having modest, real alt-coin economies provides a much better platform for experimenting and testing new features.

Quote from: Elwar on November 08, 2013, 04:47:08 AM

Bitcoin will create the infrastructure for alt currencies to survive. Focussing on that is more important than trying to bring another currency in to do that.

Agreed. Trying to tout an alt-coin to a Bitcoin-ignorant audience (especially one with no significant numbers to back up its pitch) will be infinitely more difficult than trying to get someone who already uses/accepts Bitcoin to consider trying out an alt-coin as well. So I think all these clone-coins that go around advertising themselves as "a new anonymous, decentralised currency etc." without even acknowledging Bitcoin are not only being pretentious, but shooting themselves in the foot. The alt-coins that will get adopted will be the ones that campaign on the basis of why they're an improvement over Bitcoin. Anyone who wants to see any crypto-currencies take off has a vested interest in seeing Bitcoin do well. But I disagree that it is a waste of time focussing on alt-coins atm. People often dismiss alt-coins by claiming Bitcoin's market effect is too big to suffer an alt-coin any real oxygen. But by the same token, Bitcoin's market effect is large enough that it will suffer no serious ill effects if some people decide to focus on and develop alternatives. Bitcoin becoming ubiquitous is a pre-requisite for the success of any other alt-coin. But waiting for Bitcoin to become ubiquitous before seriously trying to develop an alternative would be the death of it - by that time Bitcoin will have been long stuck in its ways, scared to innovate for fear of shocking the market, and the notion of an alternative crypto will seem so strange that it will be extremely difficult to get a foot in the market, even if hands-down superior. We need viable, innovative, active and well maintained alt-coins ready for the day when Bitcoin (and cryptocurrency in general) becomes ubiquitous, and in order to keep Bitcoin innovating until that day.