4 ms·

> Such an incredible waste of power and hardware, for a payment system that does something like 3 transactions per second globally. Bitcoin does a few transac

> Such an incredible waste of power and hardware, for a payment system that does something like 3 transactions per second globally. Bitcoin does a few transactions per second on-chain, however those few transactions per second support many more transactions per second on systems built on top of Bitcoin in a similar way to how the tx-per-second Canada's inter-bank transfer system does is quite low, but those settlement transactions support orders of magnitude more transactions per second on systems built on top of that settlement system. An example of exactly what you proposed is Blockstream's Liquid sidechain technology, which maintains a high-speed ledger secured via multi-party signing between various exchanges to allow high speed, highly efficient, off-chain transactions backed by on-chain Bitcoins.

kuschku 9y ago
So, we should use a system that’s inferior to actual simple wire transfers, which are less than 20 seconds, free transactions, directly via the ledger? I’m sorry, but I don’t see the value in Bitcoin if it is worse than SEPA transfers.
- stale2002 9y ago
  It is not worse.... That the point. There are significant advantages over a wire transfer. With bitcoin you can send money to anywhere in the world for 20cents. Thats cheaper than a 30$ wire transfer. Also, the censorship resistant part of bitcoin is really important, and is being used by the Venezuelans right now. And there are technologies being built on top of it that will make it even better. This is like 1994 internet right now. Even though it works, and has significant benefits, there are still a whole lot more stuff to come that is being worked on.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    That's the thing, I can send money with bitcoin for 20ct, or with a SEPA transfer for free. 0ct. And it's faster.
  - placeybordeaux 9y ago
    Looks like current fees are closer to 1 USD than 0.2 USD, but that's not the point, the fees are not a core feature of bitcoin. It's the censorship/manipulation bit that's the core feature IMO. There's no need to trust neither the processor or the issuer, only the protocol & distribution of hashing power.

kuschku 9y ago

So, we should use a system that’s inferior to actual simple wire transfers, which are less than 20 seconds, free transactions, directly via the ledger? I’m sorry, but I don’t see the value in Bitcoin if it is worse than SEPA transfers.

stale2002 9y ago
It is not worse.... That the point. There are significant advantages over a wire transfer. With bitcoin you can send money to anywhere in the world for 20cents. Thats cheaper than a 30$ wire transfer. Also, the censorship resistant part of bitcoin is really important, and is being used by the Venezuelans right now. And there are technologies being built on top of it that will make it even better. This is like 1994 internet right now. Even though it works, and has significant benefits, there are still a whole lot more stuff to come that is being worked on.
- kuschku 9y ago
  That's the thing, I can send money with bitcoin for 20ct, or with a SEPA transfer for free. 0ct. And it's faster.
- placeybordeaux 9y ago
  Looks like current fees are closer to 1 USD than 0.2 USD, but that's not the point, the fees are not a core feature of bitcoin. It's the censorship/manipulation bit that's the core feature IMO. There's no need to trust neither the processor or the issuer, only the protocol & distribution of hashing power.