The argument that Bitcoin itself was a "get rich quick sheme" is just so weak. This is just wrong. Bitcoin differs in many things from ltcoins.
Coinbase is right. Altcoins have been leeching off of the market cap and pushing away users with scams and whatnot.
(coming from someone who was into altcoins 1 year ago).

The funny thing is that you're all wrong. Bitcoin is unsuitable for micropayments/transactions, even Gavin Anderson said so. However, an altcoin named cryptonite makes that possible through it's miniblockchain. Bitcoin is unsuitable for instant transactions, however an altcoin named Darkcoin makes that possible through masternodes, and finally Bitcoin is unsuitable for anonymity, but however a altcoin named Monero makes that possible through it's RingSignatures.

Bitcoin has no use cases. It's useless for micro transactions, its useless for anonymity, and its useless for instant transactions. Sidechains won't help that, as another use pointed out, developers of altcoins come to improve upon bitcoin, not work with Bitcoin's flaws. And as another user said, Bitcoin is an altcoin, and it's in Beta stage with hardly any userbase compared to even apps on Google Play.

Get realistic.



Yea, and a single app on Apple Appstore/GooglePlay(Snapchat, and many others) is worth over 4x as much as Bitcoin's marketcap.

Are you legitimately retarded or trolling? Serious question. It seems you dont know what the word entity implies in that context. Regardless, I don't have time to respond to idiots. Ignored.

This might be a bit controversial, but in a sense, what he is saying has some merit.

Bitcoin is seeking mass adoption, and if people new to crypto currencies get burned on some "pump n dump" coin {not saying all Alt coins are} ....they might get discouraged, to adopt BTC too.

The problem with this is, that Alt coins imo are the testing area for BTC for many NEW innovative features and we are just human. {Not everyone wants to drink Coke, some like Orange juice}

Yes, BTC is the de facto and strongest currency, and it should be easier for NEW people to only have one option, but Alt coins should also have a place in the sun.

Do we need 900+ Alt coins? {Well that is a subject on it's own}

It's funny that you say that because for all intents and purposes, Bitcoin was the very first "shitcoin" and is currently the #1 "shitcoin". Satoshi Nakamoto mined aprox 1million Bitcoins, most early adopters bought tons at ridiculously "low" prices, and most of all Bitcoin's entire price increase history was because of an illegal trading bot using nonexistent fiat cash to buy bitcoins on MtGox.

You're trying to defend your investment in Bitcoin, I know, but it's all in vain when you look at the details.

I doubt very much that sidechains will prove a satisfactory substitute for truly independent, free-floating alternative cryptocurrencies.

For a start, welding the "alt" into a pegged straightjacket in Bitcoin creates more problems than it solves because it needs to 'hijack' a portion of the bitcoin money supply to generate the alt-coins giving rise to all kinds of liquidity problems (in Bitcoin, by taking coins out of supply and in the alts by limiting their ability to respond to market demand).

Bitcoin is already deflationary enough as it is - the altcoin market is a very nice way to address the need for a natural elasticity, monetary growth
and technological diversity without bitcoin developers constantly hammering out code and hardforks. Bitcoin can still form the reserve currency which "backs" all other alts (it's already is doing that - we price the 'alts' in BTC).

Secondly, what you see right now is the market working: it's showing you what the future's going to be. In other words, you can bolt on all the "warts" you want to Bitcoin physically but there will always be an altcoin market. There's just too much diversity in the world to be able to architect the future into a single technology. It reminds me of the 1990's when Microsoft tried to monopolise the browser market by making Internet Explorer an extension of Windows so the user had "everything in one platform". Sorry - no can do, even though your the biggest technology company in the world with 95% of adoption, your never bigger than people's imagination.

Sidechains is the kind of idea that someone has as a metaphor for what the market's doing already. It's a nice idea as an economic model but not remotely implementable in practice if the crypto-economy ever gets to a significant size because markets will just blow it away with things like decentralised exchanges which perform the same function but without all the liquidity and technology restrictions of sidechains.

That's also the position that some prominent VC's such as Fred Wilson of USV take
Incidentally, USV is an early investor in CB

Anyone who invests in any shitcoin - this includes "Lite"coin and Doge by the way - will be sucking dicks for satoshi dust within 2-3 years.

I guess he forgets the important fact that AltCoins, collectively, far superseede Bitcoin in total $$ trades.

He also forgets that many/most people only use Bitcoin to obtain AltCoins?

He also forgets (of fully understands) that his remarks only really benefit those with fat wallet?

He doesn't understand that Bitcoin has general appeal whilst AltCoins have niche appeal?

Although I'll agree that no-mining coins kill the purpose of cryptos, Bitcoin will at some point no longer be the "über alles" of cryptos.

So far all my predictions in cryptos have happened, so let me make some more crazy predictions.

Afloudist on that jackass!

Glad I don't trust them with any of my coin.