There was a problem, and now it's not a problem. Seems like a success to me.
> The developers have no idea what they're doing.
Luckily, that doesn't actually matter. Frankly, if they knew what they were doing, Dogecoin probably wouldn't even exist in the first place.
> Doge will not be able to scale up to real economic activity unless they get a real dev team.
Last I checked, DOGE had a higher total transaction volume than all other cryptocurrencies put together, sooooooooo
That said, I agree Dogecoin's dev team talent is non-existent compared to Bitcoin's, but to some extent they can just copy everything Bitcoin/Litecoin does, for now.
Charles Lee and Sunny King, two very talented developers, both made similar mistakes when they started their coins. In Charles Lee's case, be had to scrap his first coin (Fairbrix) and start over with Litecoin.
They copied the code to Litecoin. At least get your facts straight.
Dogecoin uses scrypt like litecoin, but this proof of work was first used by Tenebrix. It also employs the random block reward (vs fixed for litecoin) pioneered by LotteryTickets (which includes the ongoing 10k block reward feature). I'm not exactly sure which repo it was started from, but the wallet client, namely the 1.5 release inherits all Litecoin updates since 0.6.*.
I'd argue that the Dogecoin creators are actually quite brilliant, because they manage to exploit several known cognitive biases in humans to drive adoption. Design for the world as it actually is, not for how you would like it to be.
Presumably there would be a lot of such miners, which would increase competition for those more profitable blocks, which would essentially dampen out the expected value of the rewards. I wonder how the math works out.
The reason they argue that the changes are genius is because they either have been fooled by someone with a stake in dogecoin, or have a stake in dogecoin themselves.