Quote from: jackjack on September 08, 2014, 10:24:15 AM

Quote from: crazy_rabbit on September 08, 2014, 10:09:17 AM

Quote from: theymos on August 04, 2014, 07:10:45 AM

Stuffing your altcoin's transaction data into the Bitcoin blockchain doesn't make it not-an-altcoin. The main sections are for the Bitcoin currency and things that you can directly do with bitcoins. If I can take my bitcoins, deposit them into your site, and then do something interesting without explicitly converting to a different currency, then your site can go in the main sections. For example, a casino could use a Counterparty currency as "chips", and this would be OK for the main sections as long as the casino could automatically convert deposited BTC into these chips. Similarly, if someone was selling Overstock shares for BTC, then this trade would be OK for the main Marketplace regardless of the technology used to handle the Overstock shares. (But don't try any nonsense like saying that every unit of an altcoin is a share in a company...)

Quote from: BitcoinEXpress on August 04, 2014, 05:05:29 AM

Noob question for sure.

If a coin or protocol isn't Bitcoin, then by definition isn't it an "Alternative Currency" ?

Is Mastercoin or Counter Party, Bitcoin?

Mastercoin is a normal scamcoin (more scammy than usual, in fact). Apparently it's common to transact in BTC using Counterparty, but Counterparty also has its own currency. I suspect that Counterparty has no really useful technology, but all I can find about their technology via Google is marketing fluff (bad sign), so I can't be sure. They both use the Bitcoin block chain for timestamping instead of doing their own mining. I think that this is often a good idea, but it doesn't mean that they're not altcoins (or that they're actually useful).

By the way, if you're already using the Bitcoin block chain, then why are you even creating a currency? Just use BTC. From what little I've read about Counterparty, it looks to me like their XCP was included just to enable pump-and-dump. (The BitDNS proposal that I co-authored in 2010 was probably the first to propose using the blockchain like this, but it just used BTC.)

Regardless of whether or not something is a scam, people building things on top of the blockchain is a reality. I can understand the 'don't bloat the blockchain' thinking, but by not engaging the bitcoin 2.0 crowd there are no productive discussions about how both can coexist- be it on the blockchain or on some sort of side chain, merge mining, etc, etc, etc.....

1) Why would that be bitcoin 2.0?
2) AFAIK a potential bitcoin 2.0 is for sure NOT bitcoin.
3) It's like your old idea of making testnetcoins a valuable altcoin: non-sense

1) Why would that be bitcoin 2.0?

- Thats what the press calls it, for lack of a better word. source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/03/mastercoin-maidsafe-crowdsale/

2) AFAIK a potential bitcoin 2.0 is for sure NOT bitcoin.

- It runs on bitcoin, which can't be said of Litecoin for example, and it affects bitcoin users and miners (nodes have to hold much larger bitcoin chains, miners have to decide to filter or not their transactions). That makes it pretty relevant for bitcoin in my opinion. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean these people aren't going to still do it and you're not going to still have to deal with it. If the two (or more sides) could talk about it in a better way, maybe a better solution could be found.

3) It's like your old idea of making testnetcoins a valuable altcoin: non-sense

Yeah that was a bad idea, I admit although I thought it reasonable at the time, but time has moved on. That said, mastercoin and counterparty are nothing like testnetcoins.