And my impression is that the greediest minds that are trying to act like the best minds are behind most of the altcoins. Whenever people challenge this, the discussion never gets too technical.
I got that impression, too, in some communities (particular those around Larimer, and obviously the typical "2.0 sh!tcoins" where a nice website is more important than a solid concept). However, I wouldn't generalize that.
What sold me on bitcoin was the conjunction of the economic and the technical. Basically all altcoins seem to focus on problems that are simply not as problematic as those that bitcoin strove to solve. All the altcoins seem to be focusing on technical aspects, but none revolutionizes the economic picture the way bitcoin did.
Yep, some - probably most - altcoins do not look like they're wanting to revolutionize or "disrupt" the economy - at least not more than the 99 million startups that want to tell you they're the next Facebook. Of the top 20 altcoins, at least 15 are heavily centralized and operating more like a company than like a "decentralized economy", like Bitcoin wants to be one.
However, there are "hard problems" (energy use, privacy, scalability) that are holding back the whole crypto economy. If one of them was solved (or the situation significantly improved) by one of the altcoin projects without sacrificing security, this could benefit the "decentralized" projects even more - because the concepts could be implemented in other coins, even in Bitcoin - and the disruptive, "decentralized economy" could get a heavy boost. That's why I am supporting both Bitcoin and
some altcoins.
