3 ms·

Why would they implement Bitcoin. Guys, seriously Ethereum is a way better method for actual payments. Shorter block times, the network is not congested at all,

Why would they implement Bitcoin. Guys, seriously Ethereum is a way better method for actual payments. Shorter block times, the network is not congested at all, and they already process more transactions than BTC does per day.

MBCook 9y ago
Really? Bitcoin has name recognition with the general public. Full stop. Whatever the technical advantages/disadvantages are between those two (and any others) I imagine only Bitcoin has enough demand for them to think it would be worthwhile to implement.
- LyndsySimon 9y ago
  With services like Shapeshift, it almost doesn't make sense at all to tie yourself to a single blockchain.
- uncletammy 9y ago
  > Bitcoin has name recognition with the general public. I completely agree. Furthermore, this is the exact reason the miners, business, and community need to kill the Bitcoin chain and hand the title over to Bitcoin Cash which might actually be worth building infrastructure on.
PKop 9y ago
Square cash is also a much better way for actual payments. So perhaps the use case is not "for payments", but as a savings account. Bitcoin as store-of-value..
throwtor222 9y ago
This is a typical case of seeing things through engineering glasses instead of looking at the business case. The technology is not the limiting factor at this time. Bitcoin has more credibility, more volume, larger community, etc.
gruez 9y ago
>Guys, seriously Ethereum is a way better method for actual payments. >Shorter block times transaction security is proportional to confirmation time, not # of blocks. if you want even faster "block times", you can accept 0conf transactions. although to be fair it does allow you to be more flexible in terms of confirmation policy (you can't set your policy to confirm on 0.2 blocks). >the network is not congested at all ...with a blockchain that's growing at a rate that's over 3x of bitcoin. in the same respect, you can argue that litecoin is better because it has faster blocks, lower fees, and no congestion. >they already process more transactions than BTC does per day see point about network congestion.

MBCook 9y ago

Really? Bitcoin has name recognition with the general public. Full stop. Whatever the technical advantages/disadvantages are between those two (and any others) I imagine only Bitcoin has enough demand for them to think it would be worthwhile to implement.

LyndsySimon 9y ago
With services like Shapeshift, it almost doesn't make sense at all to tie yourself to a single blockchain.
uncletammy 9y ago
> Bitcoin has name recognition with the general public. I completely agree. Furthermore, this is the exact reason the miners, business, and community need to kill the Bitcoin chain and hand the title over to Bitcoin Cash which might actually be worth building infrastructure on.

PKop 9y ago

Square cash is also a much better way for actual payments. So perhaps the use case is not "for payments", but as a savings account. Bitcoin as store-of-value..

throwtor222 9y ago

This is a typical case of seeing things through engineering glasses instead of looking at the business case. The technology is not the limiting factor at this time. Bitcoin has more credibility, more volume, larger community, etc.

gruez 9y ago

>Guys, seriously Ethereum is a way better method for actual payments. >Shorter block times transaction security is proportional to confirmation time, not # of blocks. if you want even faster "block times", you can accept 0conf transactions. although to be fair it does allow you to be more flexible in terms of confirmation policy (you can't set your policy to confirm on 0.2 blocks). >the network is not congested at all ...with a blockchain that's growing at a rate that's over 3x of bitcoin. in the same respect, you can argue that litecoin is better because it has faster blocks, lower fees, and no congestion. >they already process more transactions than BTC does per day see point about network congestion.