I don't completely agree nor do I completely disagree. BTC has the first-mover advantage and the highest visibility, but many (rightfully, I think) argue that its functionality is older and less efficient. It's no longer true that everything moves through BTC either, given that ETH is now accepted in place of it in many locations. Even if BTC pops right now, many altcoins will continue to trudge on, and I think at the very least ETH will have an independent life of its own given its interesting premises and all its corporate involvement.
i thought about your argument before posting. but, i still wanted to give BTC the full green light for being king.
ETH is still piggybacking on BTC. ETH is not the word in the mainstream media; it is not a household name. BTC is.
while i do agree that others might come and take BTC's place. but, until then, BTC is the reason why everyone is jizzzing.
I agree, for now. What I was trying to say was that I don't think that'll necessarily be the case in the long term. Cryptocurrencies are a broad field, and I believe that BTC is big principally because it's the first success of its kind, not because of anything inherent to it, and I do think that in the long-term currencies like ETH will be on par with or valued higher than BTC because they're founded on strong ideas of their own.
yes, i have thought of the days when the price of BTC will not be in the lead.
i guess what does it for me is that BTC is written in stone. no one can change the code for this badboy. so, in that sense it is like gold: it will always have a natural inherent value. while others might take the lead, like you are suggesting, BTC, in my opinion, will still be trusted.
like i said, because the programmer is no where to be found, we're stuck with BTC as is. it can never be manipulated. unless someone finds a way to hack it, or if the original programmer all of a sudden shows up and has the secret code to fidget with the whole thing.