Technology
Everything To Know About Litecoin As A Cryptocurrency
Litecoin (LTC) is a peer-to-peer cryptocurrency created by Charlie Lee in October 2011. Often referred to as the “silver to Bitcoin’s gold,” Litecoin is based on the Bitcoin (BTC) protocol but differs primarily by having a decreased block generation time, increased maximum supply, and a different hashing algorithm.
Origins and History
The Birth of Litecoin
Charlie Lee, a former Google engineer, launched Litecoin as an open-source project on GitHub on October 7, 2011. The network went live on October 13, 2011. Lee’s goal was to create a cryptocurrency that addressed some of Bitcoin’s perceived limitations, specifically transaction speed and scalability.
Key Milestones
Launch and Early Adoption (2011-2013):
Litecoin was launched with a pre-mined genesis block.
It quickly gained popularity as one of the top alternatives to Bitcoin.
Litecoin Halving (2015):
The first Litecoin halving event occurred on August 25, 2015, reducing the block reward from 50 LTC to 25 LTC.
Segregated Witness (SegWit) Activation (2017):
Litecoin implemented SegWit in May 2017, enhancing its transaction capacity and paving the way for the Lightning Network.
Litecoin Halving (2019):
The second halving occurred on August 5, 2019, reducing the block reward from 25 LTC to 12.5 LTC.
MimbleWimble Integration (2021):
The Litecoin network began working on integrating the MimbleWimble privacy protocol to enhance transaction confidentiality.
Technical Specifications
Consensus Mechanism
Litecoin employs a proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism, similar to Bitcoin. Miners solve complex mathematical problems to validate transactions and add new blocks to the blockchain. This process secures the network and prevents double-spending.
Hashing Algorithm
Litecoin uses the Scrypt hashing algorithm, unlike Bitcoin’s SHA-256. Scrypt is memory-intensive, which was initially intended to make mining more accessible to individuals using consumer-grade hardware. This choice helped to decentralize mining efforts compared to Bitcoin, which saw a shift towards specialized hardware (ASICs).
Block Time and Reward
Block Time: Litecoin has a block generation time of approximately 2.5 minutes, which is four times faster than Bitcoin’s 10 minutes. This allows for quicker transaction confirmations.
Block Reward: The initial block reward was 50 LTC, which undergoes halving approximately every four years (840,000 blocks). The current reward, post the 2019 halving, is 12.5 LTC.
Maximum Supply
Litecoin has a capped supply of 84 million LTC, four times the maximum supply of Bitcoin’s 21 million. This scarcity is designed to create a deflationary effect over time.
Difficulty Adjustment
The mining difficulty in Litecoin adjusts every 2,016 blocks, roughly every 3.5 days, to maintain a consistent block generation rate despite changes in the network’s total hashing power.
Features and Advantages
Faster Transaction Confirmations
Litecoin’s shorter block time allows for faster transaction confirmations, making it more suitable for everyday transactions compared to Bitcoin.
Lower Transaction Fees
Litecoin transactions generally incur lower fees than Bitcoin transactions, making it a more cost-effective option for smaller payments and microtransactions.
High Liquidity
As one of the oldest and most established cryptocurrencies, Litecoin enjoys high liquidity, making it easier to buy, sell, and trade on various exchanges.
Active Development and Community
Litecoin benefits from an active development community led by the Litecoin Foundation, which continuously works on improving the network, integrating new technologies, and promoting adoption.
Use Cases
Digital Payments
Litecoin’s low fees and fast transaction times make it an ideal candidate for everyday digital payments. Merchants and individuals can use Litecoin to transact quickly and affordably.
Remittances
Litecoin can be used for cross-border remittances, providing a faster and cheaper alternative to traditional remittance services. Its high liquidity also facilitates easy conversion to local currencies.
Investment
Many investors consider Litecoin a valuable addition to their cryptocurrency portfolios due to its established history, high liquidity, and potential for appreciation.
Security
Network Security
Litecoin’s network security is maintained through its PoW consensus mechanism, requiring substantial computational power to attack the network. The use of the Scrypt algorithm adds an additional layer of security by making mining more memory-intensive.
Wallet Security
To store Litecoin securely, users can choose from various wallet options, including hardware wallets (e.g., Ledger, Trezor), software wallets (e.g., Electrum-LTC, Exodus), and mobile wallets (e.g., Trust Wallet). Hardware wallets are generally considered the most secure option.
Privacy Enhancements
The planned integration of MimbleWimble aims to enhance privacy on the Litecoin network by obfuscating transaction details. This optional feature will allow users to transact with greater confidentiality.
Comparison with Bitcoin
Similarities
Open-Source: Both Bitcoin and Litecoin are open-source projects with publicly available code.
Decentralized: Both operate on decentralized networks without central authorities.
Proof-of-Work: Both use PoW consensus mechanisms to secure their networks.
Differences
Hashing Algorithm: Bitcoin uses SHA-256, while Litecoin uses Scrypt.
Block Time: Bitcoin’s block time is 10 minutes, whereas Litecoin’s is 2.5 minutes.
Maximum Supply: Bitcoin has a maximum supply of 21 million coins, whereas Litecoin’s maximum supply is 84 million coins.
Transaction Speed and Fees: Litecoin generally offers faster transaction confirmations and lower fees compared to Bitcoin.
Challenges and Criticisms
Market Perception
Litecoin is sometimes perceived as merely a “clone” of Bitcoin with minor adjustments, leading to criticisms about its lack of innovation. However, supporters argue that its stability and minor adjustments offer practical advantages.
Competition
Litecoin faces competition from other cryptocurrencies that offer similar or superior features, such as faster transaction speeds, lower fees, or enhanced privacy. Maintaining relevance in a rapidly evolving market is an ongoing challenge.
Centralization Concerns
Despite its goal of decentralization, there are concerns about the centralization of mining power in the Litecoin network. Large mining pools can potentially control significant portions of the hashing power, posing a risk to the network’s security and decentralization.
Future Prospects
Technological Developments
The ongoing development and planned integration of technologies like MimbleWimble demonstrate Litecoin’s commitment to enhancing its network. These advancements aim to improve privacy, scalability, and overall utility.
Adoption and Integration
Increased adoption by merchants, payment processors, and financial institutions could drive further growth for Litecoin. Integration into various financial services and platforms will enhance its usability and accessibility.
Community and Governance
The Litecoin community, led by the Litecoin Foundation, plays a crucial role in the network’s development and promotion. Active community engagement and transparent governance will continue to be essential for Litecoin’s success.
Conclusion
Litecoin has established itself as a significant player in the cryptocurrency space since its inception in 2011. Its faster transaction times, lower fees, and active development community make it a viable alternative to Bitcoin for various use cases, including digital payments and remittances. While it faces challenges and competition, Litecoin’s ongoing technological developments and strong community support position it well for the future.
Understanding Litecoin’s origins, technical specifications, advantages, and potential challenges provides a comprehensive view of its role in the evolving cryptocurrency landscape. As with any investment or technological adoption, it is essential to stay informed about ongoing developments and market trends to make well-informed decisions.
This overview captures the essence of Litecoin, covering its history, technical details, advantages, challenges, and future prospects. If you have any specific questions or need more detailed information on any particular aspect, feel free to ask!
Debates over AI benchmarks — and how they’re reported by AI labs — are spilling out into public view.
This week, an OpenAI employee accused Elon Musk’s AI company, xAI, of publishing misleading benchmark results for its latest AI model, Grok 3. One of the co-founders of xAI, Igor Babushkin, insisted that the company was in the right.
The truth lies somewhere in between.
In a post on xAI’s blog, the company published a graph showing Grok 3’s performance on AIME 2025, a collection of challenging math questions from a recent invitational mathematics exam. Some experts have questioned AIME’s validity as an AI benchmark. Nevertheless, AIME 2025 and older versions of the test are commonly used to probe a model’s math ability.
xAI’s graph showed two variants of Grok 3, Grok 3 Reasoning Beta and Grok 3 mini Reasoning, beating OpenAI’s best-performing available model, o3-mini-high, on AIME 2025. But OpenAI employees on X were quick to point out that xAI’s graph didn’t include o3-mini-high’s AIME 2025 score at “cons@64.”
What is cons@64, you might ask? Well, it’s short for “consensus@64,” and it basically gives a model 64 tries to answer each problem in a benchmark and takes the answers generated most frequently as the final answers. As you can imagine, cons@64 tends to boost models’ benchmark scores quite a bit, and omitting it from a graph might make it appear as though one model surpasses another when in reality, that’s isn’t the case.
Grok 3 Reasoning Beta and Grok 3 mini Reasoning’s scores for AIME 2025 at “@1” — meaning the first score the models got on the benchmark — fall below o3-mini-high’s score. Grok 3 Reasoning Beta also trails ever-so-slightly behind OpenAI’s o1 model set to “medium” computing. Yet xAI is advertising Grok 3 as the “world’s smartest AI.”
Babushkin argued on X that OpenAI has published similarly misleading benchmark charts in the past — albeit charts comparing the performance of its own models. A more neutral party in the debate put together a more “accurate” graph showing nearly every model’s performance at cons@64:
Hilarious how some people see my plot as attack on OpenAI and others as attack on Grok while in reality it’s DeepSeek propaganda
(I actually believe Grok looks good there, and openAI’s TTC chicanery behind o3-mini-*high*-pass@”””1″”” deserves more scrutiny.) https://t.co/dJqlJpcJh8 pic.twitter.com/3WH8FOUfic— Teortaxes▶️ (DeepSeek 推特🐋铁粉 2023 – ∞) (@teortaxesTex) February 20, 2025
But as AI researcher Nathan Lambert pointed out in a post, perhaps the most important metric remains a mystery: the computational (and monetary) cost it took for each model to achieve its best score. That just goes to show how little most AI benchmarks communicate about models’ limitations — and their strengths.
We’ve all been there. A favorite item is suddenly unavailable for purchase. Couldn’t the manufacturer have given you advance warning?
Whether owing to low sales, changing habits, production costs, or even because something is a little wrong with your favorite product (shh), discontinued items are part of life. In a weekend piece, the New York Times delves into the not-so-dark underbelly of online places where shoppers find these items, share tips and yes, find emotional support.
The story highlights a padded laptop bag made by Filson that a super fan now hunts “down everywhere” to snag as many as possible “before everyone figures out how great they are.” It points to Discontinued Beauty, a site whose offerings are old to visitors but new to the site. Among its latest products: an “essential protein restructurizer” by Redkin priced at an eye-popping $169.95. (The newest version of the product costs shoppers $32.)
Could it be dangerous to use these discontinued products? Who cares, suggests one creative director, who tells the Times about a lip pencil the beauty company NARS no longer sells and she has found elsewhere. “Now, do I know the proper way to store this for optimal conditions? No,” she says. “They’re under my sink.”
The National Institute of Standards and Technology could fire as many as 500 staffers, according to multiple reports — cuts that further threaten a fledgling AI safety organization.
Axios reported this week that the US AI Safety Institute (AISI) and Chips for America, both part of NIST, would be “gutted” by layoffs targeting probationary employees (who are typically in their first year or two on the job). And Bloomberg said some of those employees had already been given verbal notice of upcoming terminations.
Even before the latest layoff reports, AISI’s future was looking uncertain. The institute, which is supposed to study risks and develop standards around AI development, was created last year as part of then-President Joe Biden’s executive order on AI safety. President Donald Trump repealed that order on his first day back in office, and AISI’s director departed earlier in February.
Fortune spoke to a number of AI safety and policy organizations who all criticized the reported layoffs.
“These cuts, if confirmed, would severely impact the government’s capacity to research and address critical AI safety concerns at a time when such expertise is more vital than ever,” said Jason Green-Lowe, executive director of the Center for AI Policy.
-
Technology8 months agoTop 10 Technologically Advanced Countries and Their Products
-
Technology7 months agoWBTC (Wrapped Bitcoin)
-
Technology8 months agoDogecoin (DOGE) Cryptocurrency
-
Technology9 months agoTop 10 Trending Laptops Of 2024
-
Technology7 months agoBKK:BCH Coin
-
Technology8 months agoCardano (ADA) Coin, Everything To Know
-
Technology7 months agoTron (TRX) Coin
-
Technology7 months agoPolygon Cryptocurrency, All You Need To Know