11 ms·

> it's much more likely that Bitcoin will just adopt whichever features that make this competitor superior since the bitcoin community continues to fail to ado

by qwtel 9y ago

> it's much more likely that Bitcoin will just adopt whichever features that make this competitor superior since the bitcoin community continues to fail to adopt the most basic measures to do something about its scalability issue (transaction fees >> $1, confirmations times >> 1h), i highly doubt that this is likely. Just like with megacorps and startups, all the money in the world can't buy you out of internal divisions and politicking.

runeks 9y ago
Bitcoin shares the same limitations in scalability as all other blockchain-based crypto-currencies. The only difference is that Bitcoin is so popular that its limitations, scalability-wise, are becoming obvious. There is no easy fix to adopt, so nothing has happened. Raising the block size isn't a fix, it just pushes the decentralization/throughput-equilibrium further towards "throughput" and further away from "decentralization".
- pjc50 9y ago
  > pushes the decentralization/throughput-equilibrium further towards "throughput" and further away from "decentralization". It's rare to see a crypto advocate admit that such a tradeoff exists!
  - runeks 9y ago
    It should be noted that our current financial system has the exact same limitation: an international bank transfer (SWIFT) costs roughly $35, which makes it entirely unsuitable for consumer-to-merchant transactions. This is fixed by using credit instruments to clear payments going from consumers to merchants, such as is done by VISA, MasterCard etc. A similar (VISA-like) clearing system can be deployed on top of Bitcoin, thus making it behave exactly as our current financial system does today. The lowest layer (Bitcoins on the blockchain/USD in a bank account) acts as the store of value, while protocols on top of this layer are used to make consumer payments sufficiently cheap.
    - pjc50 9y ago
      $35 is the retail charge for the transaction though, not what it actually costs - so e.g. within SEPA payments are free. The difficult bit of retail payments is not clearing but fraud and disputes, which bitcoin tends to wash its hands of.
      - runeks 9y ago
        My bank charges 20DKK (~$3) for a SEPA transaction. I'd be really interested if you could show me a Danish bank that offers free SEPA transfers. As for dispute resolution, I think it would be appropriate for this to be a third protocol layer -- on top of VISA-style clearing. I see no reason the clearing layer should handle this as well (and incorporating it into the Bitcoin layer would be true insanity, in my opinion). Nor do I see a reason it should be difficult. Costly, perhaps, but it's a simple matter of finding a mutually trusted third party, who won't release funds to the merchant until the consumer has received the goods.

by qwtel 9y ago

runeks 9y ago

Bitcoin shares the same limitations in scalability as all other blockchain-based crypto-currencies. The only difference is that Bitcoin is so popular that its limitations, scalability-wise, are becoming obvious. There is no easy fix to adopt, so nothing has happened. Raising the block size isn't a fix, it just pushes the decentralization/throughput-equilibrium further towards "throughput" and further away from "decentralization".

pjc50 9y ago
> pushes the decentralization/throughput-equilibrium further towards "throughput" and further away from "decentralization". It's rare to see a crypto advocate admit that such a tradeoff exists!
- runeks 9y ago
  It should be noted that our current financial system has the exact same limitation: an international bank transfer (SWIFT) costs roughly $35, which makes it entirely unsuitable for consumer-to-merchant transactions. This is fixed by using credit instruments to clear payments going from consumers to merchants, such as is done by VISA, MasterCard etc. A similar (VISA-like) clearing system can be deployed on top of Bitcoin, thus making it behave exactly as our current financial system does today. The lowest layer (Bitcoins on the blockchain/USD in a bank account) acts as the store of value, while protocols on top of this layer are used to make consumer payments sufficiently cheap.
  - pjc50 9y ago
    $35 is the retail charge for the transaction though, not what it actually costs - so e.g. within SEPA payments are free. The difficult bit of retail payments is not clearing but fraud and disputes, which bitcoin tends to wash its hands of.
    - runeks 9y ago
      My bank charges 20DKK (~$3) for a SEPA transaction. I'd be really interested if you could show me a Danish bank that offers free SEPA transfers. As for dispute resolution, I think it would be appropriate for this to be a third protocol layer -- on top of VISA-style clearing. I see no reason the clearing layer should handle this as well (and incorporating it into the Bitcoin layer would be true insanity, in my opinion). Nor do I see a reason it should be difficult. Costly, perhaps, but it's a simple matter of finding a mutually trusted third party, who won't release funds to the merchant until the consumer has received the goods.