Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Development moves faster and with far less bureaucratic hurdles than with Bitcoin. No contentious forks (thus far), they had SegWit first and chances are they will have working, beyond proof-of-concept Lightning first.



Err... Development is actually just rebasing from bitcoin. I've not seen anything go the other way.

In particular, as coauthor of the lightning spec, I assure you that we're all working on bitcoin. Litecoin happened because it was trivial; interestingly, we've deferred Bitcoin mainnet because it's likely to attract real users, who'll risk real money.


Just to affirm what this guy said, these reasons are pretty much why LTC should be on your radar. The heretic in me actually things that LTC could potentially have more value than BTC these days just because they seem to have their shit together development-wise.


The only reason they haven't had contentious forks and there is less bureaucracy is precisely because nobody cares.


Nobody cares about what? Litecoin or the bullshit?


They just successfully completed an atomic swap with bitcoin so yes LTC is defitely innovating too.


Another valuable coin missing from that list is Decred (DCR, https://decred.org/ ).

The on-chain atomic swap (no Lightning Network involved yet) was executed using Decred technology ( https://github.com/decred/atomicswap ) and was preceded by a DCR-LTC swap ( https://blog.decred.org/2017/09/20/On-Chain-Atomic-Swaps/ ).

(De)credit where credit is due. ;-)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: