2/ It's no secret that we have purposefully kept Litecoin's code very close to Bitcoin's code. Since we are mostly just merging in Bitcoin changes, we only need a lead Litecoin Core developer doing the merges and the rest of us help with code reviews, testing, and gitian builds.
3/ Adrian Gallagher (AKA thrasher) is leading Litecoin Core development right now and has been for a few years now. You may not know Adrian well as he is not on Twitter much, but he is awesome. He quietly has been working hard behind the scenes on Litecoin Core development. 👍
Fungibility is the only property of sound money that is missing from Bitcoin & Litecoin. Now that the scaling debate is behind us, the next battleground will be on fungibility and privacy.
I am now focused on making Litecoin more fungible by adding Confidential Transactions. 🚀
Litecoin dev team spent hours discussing how to add Confidential Transactions. The way to do a softfork CT is very similar to doing extension blocks and extension blk may be simpler and can do a lot more. We are now also exploring doing bulletproof MimbleWimble w/ extension blks.
1/ In the early days of Litecoin (2011), there were threats of 51% attacks. To keep Litecoin secure, I utilized checkpoints. Checkpointing is a centralizing feature as it relies on the developers deciding which is the right chain. But for the beginning of a coin, it made sense.
2/ It's trading off some centralization for network stability and reliability. Satoshi also used checkpoints in Bitcoin in the beginning. Though one can say that it is similar to the idea of UASF as users can decide whether or not to run or upgrade to the latest checkpoints.
3/ I have also considered preventing large re-orgs in the code but decided against it. There is a very good reason why I didn't do this in Litecoin and why Satoshi didn't do it for Bitcoin. Satoshi said it best in one of his emails. satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptog…
1/ On-chain Bitcoin and Litecoin payments are not peer-to-peer. Payments are sent from sender to miners, who record it on a distributed ledger. The recipient receives the payment when it's recorded. BUT, this is facilitated by a p2p network where transactions are broadcasted.
2/ The broadcast network IS p2p, but strictly speaking payments are not p2p. The sender can ignore the p2p network and directly communicate the transaction to miners to send payments. The sender doesn't have to have any communication with the recipient in any p2p manner at all!
3/ This is actually a good thing as the recipient doesn't have to be online to receive payments. Ironically, on chain payments resembles more closely to a hub and spoke model where the mining pools are the hubs and users just need to connect to those hubs to send payments.
1/ Recently, there has been a concerted effort to suppress Litecoin price by people/funds that are shorting LTC and by groups that see Litecoin as a threat. I will clear up this FUD and show why Litecoin has tremendous value.
2/ FUD: Litecoin has lost its edge and can't differentiate itself from hundreds of other altcoins.
TRUTH: Litecoin has one of the most secure networks of all altcoins. Litecoin has over $150MM of ASIC hardware protecting it. Litecoin dominates Scrypt mining by far.
3/ Miners have no incentives to attack the network because it will destroy the value of their ASIC hardware.
Litecoin has a ton of liquidity, which is important for people to get in/out of LTC. It is on practically every fiat and crypto exchange (Gemini soon), even more than ETH
1/ At the LTC Summit, I briefly addressed the motivation behind selling my LTC holdings. However, bad journalism is rampant in crypto, and now there's a sensational headline created out of a partial quote from me.
2/ I said half-jokingly that it's good that I did what I did or else I might need to find another job and can't work full-time on Litecoin (not to mention help fund the Litecoin Foundation). Of course, that's the only point this journalist picked up on and took no time to bash me
3/ re: conflict of interest, I sold my LTC holdings so I could focus on adoption and not price, as those 2 are not always correlated. Litecoin is my baby, so I don't need monetary incentive to want it to succeed.
In lite of recent 51% attacks and crypto51.app info, rest assured that the Litecoin is extremely secure and mining is very healthy. 👍🚀
- Pools are well distributed (largest 22%)
- Hashrate up 50x (past 1 year)
- High capital costs to attack ($322-761MM + ~$38-50k/hr)
Here's a quick analysis to show that DigiByte's 5-algo system isn't more secure than Litecoin. To match the whole DigiByte network, it costs about $27MM and $1k/hr to attack. But since global hashrate for each algo dominates DigiByte's, it can likely all be rented for <$5000/hr.
Going to do a live-stream @magicalcrypto show at #Consensus2018 in the Blockstream room at 5:30pm EDT. I will tweet out the streaming link later. Let me know if there's a topic you'd like us to discuss.
The BCH pump in the past few days is super impressive. I should have kept my BCH!😂
I still don't think BCH can compete with BTC long term, but markets can stay irrational for a long time. I'm glad there's a blockchain for big blockers though. Hopefully, resulting in less drama.
To be honest, BCH can compete well against LTC to be Bitcoin's silver. But their arrogance wouldn't let settle for second. Their current strategy is winner take all against Bitcoin, and they will lose because of these reasons: