Ethereum and Peercoin

It has not escaped my notice that Ethereum is worth $600 dollars, whereas Peercoin is valued $4

Obviously, this is due to speculative hype, and Ethereum will crash when Bitcoin does. Nevertheless, I find it frustrating

I would be interested if one of the Peercoin team, or indeed anyone, could give their opinion as to the respective merits of PPC vs Ethereum

Are we still the tortoise that can win the race?


There was a recent thread similar to this here…

I believe the PeerAssets protocol will be a game changer for Peercoin. Today the network is limited to simple Peercoin transactions, but PeerAssets will make it possible to build a wide range of things on top of the blockchain and make it more useful. Indicium is the primary example that will showcase our asset protocol and what people can do with it.

We’re not sitting around waiting for success. We’re actively building tools that will take us there.


Ethereum is a platform that has all batteries included. They have also done a good job with building an active development team, marketing, and attracting developers to build dapps.

Speaking of the race, what precisely is this a race to? Has Ethereum shown that has a strong security model?

The PoW incentives and fees have their issues. PoS is pending. What’s available today on Ethereum?

The smart contracts requires an appeal to higher authority in case of issues. However, is Ethereum smart contracts any innovative advancement? Wasn’t the appeal of smart contracts to avoid hey I’m a big business, I’m in trouble and I’ve been hacked, please FBI (or government agency insert) help me out. Now it’s simply, hey we made a mess up, foundation and community please help out.

So why Peercoin? The vision has remained consistent. Proof of stake is there.

What’s missing? Personally I think the advancements in greater scripting capabilities (such as the expansion) will help, in addition to the cold lock minting.

What can us technical people help with? I think building applications on top of Peercoin or PeerAssets to show the advantages of Peercoin. Also, building applications will help drive the features that need to be developed.

We have a good base blockchain, just need to use it.


wasnt ETH required to participate in a lot of ICOs?
I’m sure this lead to a price increase
the circulating supply is also 3.93 times, so relatively the price is 688.7325 times PPC’s (instead of 175.25)

1 Like

While eth does indeed have ‘batteries included’, they have drm built in. You can’t port any contracts made on eth to any other chain (except etc). PeerAssets will port to any chain, so if the chain youre using is chock full of kittens (lol) then you can move to another chain that suits your needs better.

1 Like

I can understand at a high level that it would be possible to create an asset layer above a specific blockchain. Assets use an underlying blockchain when issued or transferred.

Though not completely clear on how one would take PeerAssets to another chain and start using it? What steps would be required? Is there an example? Would be interesting to see an example or demo going back and forth between Bitcoin/Cash and Peercoin? I can try and help.

Thanks for the replies. To summarise the difference (so far) between Ethereum and Peercoin:

Ethereum has smart contracts & drm (digital rights management?) built into its blockchain

Peercoin is a “naked” chain, the emphasis of development being on security and stability - smart contracts can be “ported” onto Peercoin via Peerassets to achieve the same result as Ethereum

Is that accurate?

My use of drm was an analogy, they dont actually have drm. Eth has its own language that is not portable between chains. This allows it freedom to define a complex set of commands, but restricts infrastructure using those commands to use a chain with that language built in. This means only eth and etc.

PeerAssets uses common structure of blockchains, such as the transaction and private key format, to make a language. Because it is reusing existing data schemes, PeerAssets is limited in what it can do. However, infrastructure built on PeerAssets can be ported between blockchains rather easily, just by broadcasting the PeerAsset transactions on whatever chain you want to use.

PeerAssets has some degree of ‘a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?’ In that you can easily make a PeerAssets token spawn txn on a random chain, but no one will know unless they are running a special client designed to see it. This is similar to the ‘economic majority’ arguments surrounding forking. If no one lists the tokens on an exchange, for example, then do they really have value? The difference between this and blockchain forks is that recording a PeerAssets transaction on a blockchain will remain in the history of that chain, even if the economic majority snubs that PeerAssets project and it disappears.

Contracts on eth are similarly robust, as long as eth is robust. Basically, in comparison, eth has a more useful language, but PeerAssets allows for more cooperation amongst chains through a unified blockchain language.


I recall from first reading about Peercoin that there was an idea that Peercoin could represent a reserve currency, rather than a transactional currency. The idea being that other cryptocurrencies would have short-lived transactional spans and would regenerate at regular intervals. Is the reserve currency notion still in play and how could PeerAssets help facilitate it?

I’m thinking of short lived, short-block time, transaction-focused cryptocurrencies that could live on lite wallets on smart phones, and pairing those currencies with the security and support of Peercoin’s blockchain as akin to a “checkpoint” or “restore point”. Think of musical chairs, where Peercoin would take snapshots in time each time the music stopped. From all the use cases I’ve seen on blockchain technology, a decentralized, secure, costless and fast digital money still seems universal appealing. Peercoin seems to represent half the equation and, to my knowledge, no longterm, scalable solution for the other half has yet been found.


I think of it as using the blockchain as a permissionless third party. There is some fee, depending on supply and demand, and you pay it for the service of having a decentralized network keep unblemished record. This can be useful in a lot of ways, from storing data, to proof of timestamp, to permissionless transference of title. People will gladly pay reasonable fees for these kinds of services.