4 ms·

It was never intended to solve that. As described by the bitcoin paper, it solves the problem of decentralized cryptocurrency which is minting and preventing do

It was never intended to solve that. As described by the bitcoin paper, it solves the problem of decentralized cryptocurrency which is minting and preventing double-spending without a central authority.

dk8996 9y ago
Maybe the paper didn't address this but it sure is all over bitcoing.org. "As these services are based on Bitcoin, they can be offered for much lower fees than with PayPal or credit card networks." https://bitcoin.org/en/faq https://bitcoin.org/en/faq
cortesoft 9y ago
But 'not having a central authority' is only valuable if the alternative solves the problems that having a central authority causes. The main problems I have heard articulated about a central authority is that they have high costs, are slow, and can block transactions or withold funds with no recourse. Bitcoin doesn't solve the first two issues; does it really solve the third, either? Maybe, but there are also a host of NEW issues that it brings up, too.
- mbrock 9y ago
  On the contrary, centrally authorized systems can be extremely fast and cheap. Postgres outperforms any blockchain. The issues are about authority and power, and also the barriers to innovation and access which that power imposes. Payment channels can solve scaling issues in blockchains just like various settlement layers solve the slowness of bank transfers. Some people don't want such a solution, but it's still a solution. Development doesn't happen the way we want. Some people want cryptocurrencies to stop existing, which seems unlikely. Bitcoin's development is really thorny because of diverse interests and general incentivized hostility; that's just reality. Maybe a faster blockchain will gradually take Bitcoin's market share. Maybe Bitcoin will remain quite valuable. If you know a certain answer to this, there are large profit opportunities!

dk8996 9y ago

Maybe the paper didn't address this but it sure is all over bitcoing.org. "As these services are based on Bitcoin, they can be offered for much lower fees than with PayPal or credit card networks." https://bitcoin.org/en/faq https://bitcoin.org/en/faq

cortesoft 9y ago

But 'not having a central authority' is only valuable if the alternative solves the problems that having a central authority causes. The main problems I have heard articulated about a central authority is that they have high costs, are slow, and can block transactions or withold funds with no recourse. Bitcoin doesn't solve the first two issues; does it really solve the third, either? Maybe, but there are also a host of NEW issues that it brings up, too.

mbrock 9y ago
On the contrary, centrally authorized systems can be extremely fast and cheap. Postgres outperforms any blockchain. The issues are about authority and power, and also the barriers to innovation and access which that power imposes. Payment channels can solve scaling issues in blockchains just like various settlement layers solve the slowness of bank transfers. Some people don't want such a solution, but it's still a solution. Development doesn't happen the way we want. Some people want cryptocurrencies to stop existing, which seems unlikely. Bitcoin's development is really thorny because of diverse interests and general incentivized hostility; that's just reality. Maybe a faster blockchain will gradually take Bitcoin's market share. Maybe Bitcoin will remain quite valuable. If you know a certain answer to this, there are large profit opportunities!