Dec

15

Centralized, broken hash function, aggressive developers, highly questionable PR, rolling their own crypto. Avoid like the plague. Happy to be proven wrong.

Chris Cooper writes: 

Yes, that's the FUD, as they say. It pays to investigate deeper.

Centralized — a temporary measure only until the network reaches adequate scale.

Broken hash function — supposedly on purpose, never led to any loss of coins, corrected without subsequent issue.

Aggressive developers — true…but what I care about is extremely competent developers, and they have that.

Highly questionable PR — founders don't care about PR, which means that it gets little attention.

Roll their own crypto — true, and it was good…but when they got feedback about potential issues, they changed to standard crypto. They will likely change back at some point.

You could add these negatives:
* Crappy wallet
* Protocol designed for machines, not humans
* Uncertainty in confirmation time, though it's faster than most others

All these negatives, and still the coin is worth 12 billion USD at this writing. Why?
* Zero transaction fees, enabling micropayments
* Zero miners
* It scales


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

Archives

Resources & Links

Search