4 ms·

I suppose it depends if there's someone manipulating it. A coin like Bitcoin is immune to internal manipulation -- there's one Bitcoin mined every ten minutes,

I suppose it depends if there's someone manipulating it. A coin like Bitcoin is immune to internal manipulation -- there's one Bitcoin mined every ten minutes, and no one can change that, no matter how much money they have. Satoshi proved that a blockchain is only secure if it's the blockchain with the longest accumulated proof-of-work record. Dogecoin's blockchain is shorter, and they can't win a race where the other players are already ahead. Miners will generally only mine the blockchain with the most value, thus the market for one mining the leading crypto squeezes out the market for mining all the others. Miners must vote with their electricity as to which blockchain to support. No other blockchain can ever maintain its stability as long as Bitcoin exists. The game theory that backs Bitcoin also proves that all other cryptocurrencies cannot work in the long term.

tromp 4y ago
> Dogecoin's blockchain is shorter Not only is blockchain length immaterial to its relevancy, but Dogecoin's chain is in fact longer, as its block interval is only 1 minute, so it is asymptotically 10 times longer than Bitcoin. > there's one Bitcoin mined every ten minutes You mean one block (containing an subsidy starting at 50 Bitcoin that's halved every 4 years). > Miners will generally only mine the blockchain with the most value Wrong; SHA256 miners will mine the most profitable SHA256 chain, such as Bitcoin. Scrypt miners have totally different ASICs and will mine the most profitable scrypt chain. > No other blockchain can ever maintain its stability as long as Bitcoin exists. The game theory that backs Bitcoin also proves that all other cryptocurrencies cannot work in the long term. The theory behind Bitcoin long term security is rather shaky in fact, requiring a constant backlog of high-fee paying transactions once its block subsidy becomes insignificant. Chains with a tail emission face no such issues.
- Salgat 4y ago
  Length doesn't mean much, it's size that matters, and that comes down to total transactions across all blocks, as transactions per block is not some fixed number.
  - billylindeman 4y ago
    So it's the girth that matters?
    - yellowapple 4y ago
      Using 'em as actual currencies tends to benefit from sidechains that speed up the flow of transactions - "veins", if you will - so the more girthy and veiny it is, the better.
IYasha 4y ago
>> A coin like Bitcoin is immune to internal manipulation Even if NSA..I mean, "Satoshi" was to do something with his 1.1M BTC?
- randomhodler84 4y ago
  Why would spending some old coinbase tx’s from a decade+ ago have any impact on core parameters of the protocol? Whomever is spending coins has no impact on coin emission. I highly doubt they could even bribe the Protocol maintainers.
Schroedingersat 4y ago
> Satoshi proved that a blockchain is only secure if it's the blockchain with the longest accumulated proof-of-work record. This statement is correct, but you appear to be fundamentally misunderstanding it. The category being considered is that of blockchains making incompatible claims about the same truth. Events on the dogecoin blockchain are making no claims about the bitcoin blockchain and vice versa, so this statement is irrelevant. Similarly it is irrelevant between any two distinct tokens even if they originate as forks of another token. You could download the BTC blockchain, take it to a distant planet and transact with it using only local compute just fine. It's just that -- were you to re-establish contact with earth -- omicron-persei-eight-BTC and earth-BTC would now be different tokens. So long as some subset of the population agreed to use the former it would be a valid token and earthlings could transact on your blockchain with their wallets (at the balance they had when you left), it just wouldn't be earth-BTC
- kayamon 4y ago
  As long as communication can occur between the two populations (FTL will present its own problems in years to come), they will trade using the best money available and will not mine the lesser blockchain. All non-leading blockchains will ultimately fail. Tick tock next block.

tromp 4y ago

> Dogecoin's blockchain is shorter Not only is blockchain length immaterial to its relevancy, but Dogecoin's chain is in fact longer, as its block interval is only 1 minute, so it is asymptotically 10 times longer than Bitcoin. > there's one Bitcoin mined every ten minutes You mean one block (containing an subsidy starting at 50 Bitcoin that's halved every 4 years). > Miners will generally only mine the blockchain with the most value Wrong; SHA256 miners will mine the most profitable SHA256 chain, such as Bitcoin. Scrypt miners have totally different ASICs and will mine the most profitable scrypt chain. > No other blockchain can ever maintain its stability as long as Bitcoin exists. The game theory that backs Bitcoin also proves that all other cryptocurrencies cannot work in the long term. The theory behind Bitcoin long term security is rather shaky in fact, requiring a constant backlog of high-fee paying transactions once its block subsidy becomes insignificant. Chains with a tail emission face no such issues.

Salgat 4y ago
Length doesn't mean much, it's size that matters, and that comes down to total transactions across all blocks, as transactions per block is not some fixed number.
- billylindeman 4y ago
  So it's the girth that matters?
  - yellowapple 4y ago
    Using 'em as actual currencies tends to benefit from sidechains that speed up the flow of transactions - "veins", if you will - so the more girthy and veiny it is, the better.

IYasha 4y ago

>> A coin like Bitcoin is immune to internal manipulation Even if NSA..I mean, "Satoshi" was to do something with his 1.1M BTC?

randomhodler84 4y ago
Why would spending some old coinbase tx’s from a decade+ ago have any impact on core parameters of the protocol? Whomever is spending coins has no impact on coin emission. I highly doubt they could even bribe the Protocol maintainers.

Schroedingersat 4y ago

> Satoshi proved that a blockchain is only secure if it's the blockchain with the longest accumulated proof-of-work record. This statement is correct, but you appear to be fundamentally misunderstanding it. The category being considered is that of blockchains making incompatible claims about the same truth. Events on the dogecoin blockchain are making no claims about the bitcoin blockchain and vice versa, so this statement is irrelevant. Similarly it is irrelevant between any two distinct tokens even if they originate as forks of another token. You could download the BTC blockchain, take it to a distant planet and transact with it using only local compute just fine. It's just that -- were you to re-establish contact with earth -- omicron-persei-eight-BTC and earth-BTC would now be different tokens. So long as some subset of the population agreed to use the former it would be a valid token and earthlings could transact on your blockchain with their wallets (at the balance they had when you left), it just wouldn't be earth-BTC

kayamon 4y ago
As long as communication can occur between the two populations (FTL will present its own problems in years to come), they will trade using the best money available and will not mine the lesser blockchain. All non-leading blockchains will ultimately fail. Tick tock next block.