3 ms·
Not to mention, with faster (easier) confirmations you need more of them to form the same cumulative proof of work. If anything, Litecoin is magnitudes weaker d
by nwh 14y ago
Not to mention, with faster (easier) confirmations you need more of them to form the same cumulative proof of work. If anything, Litecoin is magnitudes weaker due to the slower hashrate compared with Bitcoin.
- lucb1e 14y ago> If anything, Litecoin is magnitudes weaker due to the slower hashrate compared with Bitcoin But that doesn't say anything about Litecoin, it only says something about Litecoin's current state of being. Bitcoin could similarly be said to have a hashrate surmountable by a few wealthy companies working together. Things will improve over time, and certainly if Litecoin proves to be the better, it will have a bigger hash rate than Bitcoin. It's like saying "Windows is better because more people use Windows". Yeah of course there is more support for the most used platform, but that doesn't say anything about the quality of a newly released OS X. It may well be better, and in ten years it might be biggest. Not saying it will be, but it might. Same goes for Bitcoin vs Litecoin hashrate.