I just browsed through article but it looks he talks about volume and then compare it with marketcap. It is logical % will be different. Volume of Bitcoin is high because most of altcoins are traded with bitcoin.
see here's the thing:
there is no token called "bcash" on [coinbase](https://www.coinbase.com) or [bitpay](https://bitpay.com) or [coinmarketcap](https://coinmarketcap.com) or [bitfinex](https://www.bitfinex.com) or [poloniex](https://poloniex.com) or [gemini] (https://gemini.com) or [bitstamp](https://www.bitstamp.net) or [huobi](https://www.huobi.com) or [binance](https://www.binance.com) or any of [a hundred other exchanges or payment processors](https://coin.market/exchanges).
So what gives? What is it about you guys insisting on being so boldly deceptive?
People should learn [about the term bcash](https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6r4no6/its_called_bitcoin_cash_the_term_bcash_is_a). There's [more about the term bcash here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/b47x1f/the_bcash_name_is_a_social_engineering_attack)
He is not alone. Many good people got played.
www.cointracking.info lists 6909 coins. CMC only lists 2473 so that's 4436 dead coins. Then CMC still lists hundreds of coins with $0 daily volume and only 67 cmc listed coins do more then $10M daily volume.
You can't DCA *out* of something. Think about it. The strategy would do exactly the opposite of what you'd want: you'd be selling more of the asset when its price is low and selling less of it when its price is high. You can do better by selling a fixed quantity of the asset at regular intervals (instead of a fixed value), but even that won't give you the same advantage that DCA'ing *in* gives you.
Market dominance is one thing. The more interesting one (for me at least) is engineeeing, software development and intellectual dominance. A lot harder, if not impossible, to “measure”, but fun to think about.
Compare listening (or reading) rusty, the two matts, (corralo and blue), kanzure, ptodd, author of libbitcoin, jnewbury, adamb, pwullie, lopp to any alt proponent/creator or fanboy; they are different because of the depth of knowledge, experience and lack of hyperbole.
All the alts (if not outright scams) seem to be marked by infantile idealism, mismatch between intent and capability and emphasis on marketing efforts. That is why I said there is intellectual dominance. It is fun to think how it came to be; the origin context of bitcoin. It wasn't launched on Web 2.0 website ---like it could have--- but on a mailing list; not massively significant, but another tidbit of substance over style.
As for an unsophisticated metric if you compare academic papers for bitcoin, ethereum,
1. bitcoin: Results: 768
1. ethereum: Results: 79
1. iota: Results: 7
1. litecoin: 4
1. monero: 1
(from Web of Science Core Collection)
How many shit/alt coin creators or proponents can express their software in terms of economic or political theory ? Look at saifdeen or szasbo (or even 'characters' like j.song, s.palley or bitsteins) each more eloquent and well versed than all those who represent the alt space. It is really no match IMO, and we haven't even got to the hearts, btctina vays, hedl pomps and lopps, or for that matter the Bizonacci, cryptocobains and Jim btcs (nor for that matter back in the day MP(OE) and amir.).
As I said, metrics are somewhat pointless, as are appeals to authority. It is a matter of opinion or taste. I find bitcoiners dominate intellectually because they have richer, deeper and more varied ideas, arguments and convictions (i.e. better memes).
it's slowest than most top 100 coins, has higher fees than all top 100 coins, consumes more energy than denmark (and who'se hashrate is controlled by 5/6 chinese individuals), has no privacy, but okay.
It's shitty technology that barely changed since 10 years ago.
Rules are barely changed... and that's a good thing....
The problem with the people is that they don't really understand what they are buying...
You want best payment system? the fastest? the most accepted? what the fuck are you looking into crypto? you want a decentralized network of thousands of nodes with different hardware, location and bandwidth behave as paypal mainframe... go and buy lies my friend, but the market will teach you a lesson...
Alt coins can be thought of as test networks for technologies that bitcoin may adopt later. There is way too much capital on the BTC blockchain at risk to implement new tech onto it without thorough testing. If a new technology is implemented on BTC and it creates an unforeseen point of failure there is over 100 billion dollars of the world's wealth that goes up in smoke. This is why most new technologies that have come to bitcoin (segwit, lightning, etc...) were implemented on alt coins first. If an alt coin has a technology that is shown to to be both worthwhile and bomb proof, it can be applied to bitcoin at any time.
Bitcoin has a testnet (multiple these days). Shitcoins are not its testnet. They're merely displays of how to clearly NOT do shit and how incredibly stupid people are for dumping their money in them.
\> This is why most new technologies that have come to bitcoin (segwit, lightning, etc...) were implemented on alt coins first.
Where the hell did you get that horse shit? That's completely untrue.
Segwit and lightning were both implemented by/on LTC before BTC, as far as I've been told.
Yea, I understand BTC has many testnets, and that is where new technologies are tested for BTC first, of course. My point was more that if a technology for an alt coin seemed desirable, it is totally conceivable that that concept could be implemented by BTC if there was consensus.
You were clearly duped.
SegWit was invented and developed by Bitcoin (core) devs. By the time it was finished and tested, Litecoin devs copy/pasted it and applied it to their (otherwise also 100% copy/pasted from Bitcoin) codebase. And because Litecoin is completely centralized and run by one guy, it was easier for them to roll out. Whooptidoo.
LN was an independent invention building on Bitcoin script (which coincidentally is copied by basically all in shitcoins, so it may theoretically work on some of them too, but almost none have even tried, let alone succeeded). The initial theoretical concept didn't require SegWit, but the actual LN software in existance uses enhanced constructs only only using SegWit and checklocktimeverify enhancements put into Bitcoin since. And further BIPs (yes, Bitcoin, not Shitcoin, Improvemnt Proposals) are in the works to make LN even more efficient. Most shitcoins don't even have SegWit or CLTV, let alone keep up with other code changes, so all of those will never run LN. Actual LN software is being built by basically Bitcoiners (none of them have any affiliation with any shitcoin) and for Bitcoin (they're not actively trying to block shitcoins, but since no shitcoin devs have the skills to get it to work and keep up with the changes, in practice it's only Bitcoin).
Very very far from the picture you're trying to paint here. Scams do not deserve the light of day, let alone active white washing.
\> if a technology for an alt coin seemed desirable, it is totally conceivable that that concept could be implemented by BTC if there was consensus.
That has been one of the selling points when the first shitcoins came out. Yes, any tech created outside could possibly be integrated into Bitcoin. In practice nothing from other coins has flowed into Bitcoin. What is flowing into Bitcoin is honest research and hard work, which is coincidentally not pre-funded before non-delivery by selling worthless tokens to suckers.
Is it litecoin shill season?
No! Litecoin is and always was from the very start a clear scam. From the premine to the "ASIC resistant" to the "faster" to the "silver" sales pitch bullshit. It never innovated anything, it's merely copy/pasted code from Bitcoin, only sometimes a little before it was rolled out in Bitcoin.
It's also as off topic as all other scamcoins.
> Bitcoin's one of the worst coins technologically out there
you have no idea what you are talking about. innovations made by bitcoin devs are used by virtually all shitcoins. then shitcoin devs modify their block time and supply cap or move to a completely centralized network model and you idiots call that innovation. the cryptocurrency "space" is a joke
> Bitcoin's one of the worst coins technologically out there and the only one people care about.
This might blow your mind; but bitcoin is actually the strongest design out there.
Altcoiners are obsessed with the idea that their coin is somehow better than BTC because of feature X, Y, X etc.
But its all marketing; you dont really think a malnourished hobby developer with a weed addiction and an MBA who specialized in marketing can outcompete hundreds of the best cryptographers and cypherpunks who ever lived? Bitcoin core is staffed by legends and heroes, no other project even comes close. These people are pushing the boundaries of cryptography in real time.
When you realize that bitcoin dominates because it is the strongest in technology, and you realize that criticisms of bitcoin are really just criticisms of what is possible with the state of the art, then you will finally understand why BTC dominates.
There is no real competition to bitcoin; this has been a one horse race the whole time.
Indeed on many important standpoints it is the best coin by far.
And getting better in one single point while taking shortcuts in any other point like 99% of the shitcoins does is really nothing to compare to.