21 ms·

From what I understand bitcoin currently has a $20+ transaction fee with a transaction time takes 60 minutes+ With these issues in addition to the high power c

• AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  It won't and even BTC enthusiasts have given up on that. They narrative is now that BTC is a "store of value".
  • onion2k 6y ago
    It won't It won't for small transactions. Buying a car or a house with BTC could still be viable in the future.
    • gambiting 6y ago
      I still don't see how. When we bought our house in the UK I sent the entire transfer from my phone, paid 0 fee, and it arrived 30 seconds later. Why would I use bitcoin for it?
      • leesalminen 6y ago
        I’m currently buying a house internationally. International wire transfers take multiple days and I have to produce all sorts of documents for the receiving country’s government showing the source of the money. It’s an annoying and lengthy process. I’d much rather send BTC to a wallet than this.
        • Hamuko 6y ago
          Are you saying that if you were buying a house with Bitcoin that the government wouldn't want to see where the money is sourced from?
          • alisonkisk 6y ago
            Bitcoin is useful for evading the law, but of course there had a host of other issues and risks.
            • Twisell 6y ago
              Like finding out that the house is actually not yours after landing in a foreign country and having spend you life saving on a BTC transaction. Big issues, big risks, but maybe you have big balls too... I personally don't feel so self assured about myself.
              • deleted 6y ago
                [deleted]
          • nannal 6y ago
            It would be easier, this TX came from my work's hotwallet & this one was part of my inheritance, you can see these TXs where that address sent to the tax authority assuring all tax has been paid as opposed to being passed around a call centre to talk to "Bob" so the bank can provide those details.
            • gambiting 6y ago
              So......exactly the same way it works with a bank nowadays? When I did it it was just a printed statement from my bank(that I printed myself), showing money arriving from X account, Y amount paid for tax, document from solicitor confirming inheritence, 3 copies of my payslip, done. How exactly is that easier with bitcoin?
        • jcranmer 6y ago
          The main reason for a lot of that documentation is know your customer/anti-money-laundering laws. Even if you were sending BTC, you would still have to provide that documentation to not break the law.
        • gambiting 6y ago
          No they don't? I frequently send large(about £50k/month) amounts of money between one EU country and UK, we always pay extra(50 euro) to have the transfer done as an express transfer and the money arrives within 60 minutes in the UK bank. Or if you don't mind doing a SEPA transfer then it's 15 minutes. And no, I was never asked to prove any source of anything, it's an invoice payment, it goes straight through. Maybe by "international" you mean something else, but at least in the EU(and EEA and UK) transfers can be incredibly quick.
          • sneak 6y ago
            14x more people live outside of SEPA than live within it.
            • gambiting 6y ago
              And it's the biggest(by operating revenue) market in the world, what's your point?
              • sneak 6y ago
                Apologies, I thought I was being clear. A payment system that lets people transfer unlimited amounts of value to 14x more people than SEPA (presuming internet access), without censorship, irreversibly, and effectively for free, has, it seems to me, substantial value. Even if it's less useful than, say, access to SEPA, it'd have to be 14x less valuable to break even (again, presuming internet access available to everyone, which isn't a thing yet).
                • Hamuko 6y ago
                  Does the SEPA network use >1.0 Argentina worth of electricity to operate?
                • JackFr 6y ago
                  > irreversibly People think that's a feature until they don't.
        • corford 6y ago
          >International wire transfers take multiple days Not in the EU they don't. A SEPA transfer takes max 1 business day and is usually free. More info: https://www.gbm.hsbc.com/solutions/global-liquidity-and-cash-management/global-payables/-/media/gbm/solutions/attachments/sepa/your-guide-to-sepa https://www.gbm.hsbc.com/solutions/global-liquidity-and-cash...
        • picks_at_nits 6y ago
          If you are buying and selling real estate in a functioning jurisdiction, hiding your identity by making the payment opaque is not going to do much for you. There are title deeds and tax rolls. In many jurisdictions you have obligations like building codes that need to be inspected and an owner needs to be held to account. If you need privacy, you have to set up shell companies to act as the legal owner, not hide the payment from your bank or government. Speaking of showing the source of the money, if you bought my house from me with bitcoin, I would have to speak to a lawyer about not running afoul of money-laundering regulations. And no, I won’t take the internet’s word for it that somehow, those laws only pertain to fiat currency. Something tells me that the cost of fighting my government in court would far exceed the value of my home regardless of whether I was technically in the right not to fill out all those same forms.
        • JackFr 6y ago
          Ummm, I've seen a lot of movies and international wire transfers are not like that at all. Basically one click and they're instantaneous. Well, almost -- they do always feature cool progress bars as the money is transferred.
      • gsich 6y ago
        Maybe you don't want your bank to know.
        • Hamuko 6y ago
          For what reason?
          • gsich 6y ago
            Any reason.
            • Hamuko 6y ago
              Like what? For what reason would one not want their bank to know that they have a house?
              • gsich 6y ago
                The reason is "any reason". A wildcard. "I don't want them to know." is therefore a valid reason.
        • rvx80 6y ago
          You can't just buy a house with a suitcase full of cash these days, it's not possible. The gov will be asking where that money came from, to prevent money laundering and to ensure it's not proceeds of crime. Whether not you agree with that, this is the situation. The idea that somehow they'll let you buy something with Bitcoin without requiring the same level of disclosure is a complete fantasy.
          • gambiting 6y ago
            While I think technically there isn't anything stopping you from buying a house with hard cash in the UK, I very much doubt that either side's solicitor would agree to it without extensive documentation as to where how and when you got that cash.
      • lkbm 6y ago
        Meanwhile, if I want to donate over $25,000 to charity in the US, I have to go into the bank (in person even during the pandemic) spend half an hour while they fill out forms, pay a $12 fee (still negligible, granted), and they'll process it within 12 hours. Bitcoin might not be as good as the UK, but you have to understand that the consumer US financial system remains stuck in the 1980s.
        • jefftk 6y ago
          > if I want to donate over $25,000 to charity in the US, I have to go into the bank (in person even during the pandemic) spend half an hour while they fill out forms, pay a $12 fee (still negligible, granted), and they'll process it within 12 hours. You can do it from home for a negligible fee ($0-$3) if you're ok with ACH instead. (Same-day ACH has a max of $100k, though it used to be $25k. Next-day ACH is something like $100M, though your bank likely has a lower limit.)
      • inter_netuser 6y ago
        banks in the UK are operating a charity? someone pays for all those skyscrapers.
        • gambiting 6y ago
          Well I mean, clearly they make their money elsewhere. I don't pay anything for having an account, debit card for it, or for making any transfers - that's with barclays. So their entire money making process is elsewhere.
    • mschip 6y ago
      In what way? As in financiers will pay with BTC? I don't know many people who pay for their cars or houses in one payment. Or is the suggestion that scheduled recurring monthly payments are viable?
      • rjsw 6y ago
        Paying for cars with one payment is fairly common, I just used my debit card for my current one.
      • alisonkisk 6y ago
        Poor people don't. Many rich people do.
    • bob33212 6y ago
      I want Banks and Regulators involved when I buy a house. I understand that these 3rd parties can make things take longer or add extra fees, but that gives me legal protections I don't get with bitcoin.
  • HashBasher 6y ago
    It will. Via second and third layers. It'll scale just fine. An example second layer that you can use right now is the lightning network https://lightning.network/ https://lightning.network/
    • Nursie 6y ago
      Lightning is a joke, with insoluble routing problems, a need for always-on nodes, the requirement to lock funds in channels, and the requirement for on-chain transactions to start and close channels. The BTC network can't process enough transactions to make even that viable.
      • gruez 6y ago
        >with insoluble routing problems can you elaborate on this? >a need for always-on nodes AFAIK if you're not a payment hub (ie. you want to route other people's payments) you don't need to be always online.
        • Nursie 6y ago
          > can you elaborate on this? Haviong trouble finding it now, but google "lightning network routing problems" and you'll get a lot of results. IIRC the fundamental issue boils down to a hard mathematical problem about node traversal that is not yet solved. I am having trouble recalling the name right now, apologies. > AFAIK if you're not a payment hub (ie. you want to route other people's payments) you don't need to be always online. There have been ways that a counterparty can close a channel in their favour if you aren't online. Perhaps this has been fixed by now.
          • gruez 6y ago
            >There have been ways that a counterparty can close a channel in their favour if you aren't online. Perhaps this has been fixed by now. AFAIK the fix is to have a service (or multiple) stay online for you, and I believe it could be done without requiring access to your private keys. If your counterparty broadcasts a stale transaction that's in their favor, your service will broadcast a newer transaction that reverts it.
  • wpietri 6y ago
    Exactly. Here's VC and prominent cryptocurrency enthusiast Fred Wilson saying exactly that: https://avc.com/2017/08/store-of-value-vs-payment-system/ https://avc.com/2017/08/store-of-value-vs-payment-system/ While I agree with him that Bitcoin is a terrible currency, I think the "store of value" thing is nonsense as well. Stores of value need to have relatively stable value. Bitcoin is hugely volatile. That's great for speculation, but nobody with any sense would use it as the equivalent of a savings account.
    • mj4m1n 6y ago
      When in doubt, zoom out. On larger timescales, this isn't really that much of an issue. Volatility is also trending downwards. The bigger it gets, the more stable it becomes.
      • MereInterest 6y ago
        You're appealing to future data that are not available yet. Bitcoin has never been stable in its existence. You are positing without evidence that it will become stable in the future.
        • _alex_ 6y ago
          Many assets start volatile and become more stable over time. As more money comes into bitcoin and the market cap goes up, it's reasonable to assume that volatility will go down.
          • mcosta 6y ago
            Many assets start volatile and end up in a stable 0.
        • mj4m1n 6y ago
          https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-volatility/ https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-volatility/
      • beefield 6y ago
  • maclured 6y ago
    It's going to take some pretty big balls to dump your money into bitcoin instead of gold or cash the next time the stock market crashes. Then we'll see how good a store of value it is.
    • nickysielicki 6y ago
      Big balls, surely, but are we waiting to see that happen, or haven't we seen that happen? The stock market has settled around ATHs, not pushing too far down or up. Meanwhile, 40% of all US currency ever minted has been printed in the last 365 days [1], and Bitcoin is worth nearly $50k. Maybe it's just me, but it's clear to me that markets crashed, the shockwave just hasn't been felt by everyone yet. [1]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M1 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M1
      • maclured 6y ago
        No, I mean a depression. What we've seen is investors scrambling to find returns in riskier assets due to low interest rates, but the bubble hasn't burst yet. Once it does, we're likely to see a depression at some point [1]. Since Bitcoin is famously volatile I'd bet that once there's a scare, people who've pumped the price up to the current highs will abandon it in droves. After all, there's a huge difference in risk between buying in <$5k vs ~$30-50k [1] https://economicprinciples.org/ https://economicprinciples.org/
        • sub7 6y ago
          We know exactly what happens in a rush to liquidity. BTC/other non income producing "assets" are the first to go.
    • iexplainbtc 6y ago
      I'd rather invest into something that is highly volatile but almost certainly appreciates over time rather than something that depreciates at a predictable yet increasing rate. We could discuss the fact that BTC might be overpriced or underpriced, nobody really knows. But that it's going to go up in value (in terms of purchasing power) in the long term is, black swan events aside, almost a certainty because of its engineered stock to flow. Scarcity is real whether it's physical or digital (as we've seen with art, collectibles or more recently NFTs). Gold is a good store of value because of historically predictable scarcity but it's not predictable with certainty. Bitcoin is. We'll know exactly how many bitcoins are in circulation 10 minutes, 10 days, 10 or even 100 years from now. If anything many will be lost, which will contribute to its scarcity. Will Bitcoin be replaced by something else in the future? Almost certainly. But let's not forget that unbacked cash has been around for just half a century. Even if Bitcoin is replaced by something 50, 100 years from now that's plenty of time for a couple of generations to use it as a store of value (and payment system).
  • auggierose 6y ago
    But it doesn't have any value. Except that some people think it has. In times of truly global trouble, nobody will accept bitcoins as payment for bread.
    • samfisher83 6y ago
      That is true of a lot of things. Would diamonds or gold be as valuable if people didn't think it was a store of value?
      • auggierose 6y ago
        You can use diamonds to cut things. As for store of value, nobody sees it as a store of value. If you think it has value, go and buy a large diamond from a jewellery store, and then try to sell it somewhere for the same price.
      • RC_ITR 6y ago
        Diamonds are mostly consumption. Used diamonds always sell for WAY less than new, unless there’s some other factor.
      • ragnese 6y ago
        Right. It's all mass psychology. Gold, the stock market, bitcoin, whatever. It only has value as long as people believe it has value. The caveat of course is that all of the things I listed have SOME more inherent value, but that is NOT the major contributor to their actual trading prices. Gold is not THAT useful. Neither is owning a billionth of a company.
        • Grustaf 6y ago
          Obviously this is much less true for gold than for bitcoin, and the value of the stock market is very real. If you own a piece of Apple or the local hot dog stand, you own a piece of something that is continuously producing value for people.
          • 6y ago
  • mj4m1n 6y ago
    For many BTC enthusiasts the store of value narrative has been in place for a very long time. “I see Bitcoin as ultimately becoming a reserve currency for banks, playing much the same role as gold did in the early days of banking. Banks could issue digital cash with greater anonymity and lighter weight, more efficient transactions.” - Hal Finney (2010)
    • Igelau 6y ago
      > Banks could issue digital cash with greater anonymity Why would (a) my bank want to do this, and (b) why would I want my bank to do this?
      • inter_netuser 6y ago
        just post all your financial statements on the web for everyone to see. you've got nothing to hide, right?
      • mj4m1n 6y ago
        The point here is that bitcoin is incredibly transparent, which on one level one may welcome, but on another certainly not. (a) providing cash level privacy to customers, which (b) they should probably value more than they do.
        • PeterisP 6y ago
          What "cash level privacy"? Banks have to report all significant cash transactions and ensure that customers can't deal large quantities of cash anonymously; and in the exact same manner they would also have to report all significant e-cash transactions and ensure that every customer with whom they deal large quantities of e-cash can't be anonymous.
    • Grustaf 6y ago
      Now I'm confused. Bitcoin is not lighter weight than existing digital cash. It's not really lighter weight than anything. Well, possibly the large hadron collider consumes more, I don't know.
  • neilwilson 6y ago
    I'd rather use Whisky as my store of value. With that you can still have a party when the power goes off.
    • twaybtclong 6y ago
      My bitcoin bought my airplanes, wine cellar, and whiskey collection. It's comparatively very difficult to hold as it's price increases.
  • harikb 6y ago
    I think both of you agree on this one - once it is too expensive to transact, it will be a permanent store of value ;p
    • lottin 6y ago
      Yes, the only question is what amount of value it will store. N.B.: Zero is an amount.
  • tal8d 6y ago
    I haven't received my official enthusiast talking points memo, but the obvious solution was proposed years ago: off chain transaction that use smart contracts for settlement on the public ledger. I vaguely remember "store of value" being used for what would more accurately be described as "trust anchor" or "root authority".
    • MichaelApproved 6y ago
      As you've said, it's been years since that was proposed but it's still not helping because none of the off chain networks have gotten any traction. Admittedly, my experience with BTC is limited so please enlighten me if I have this wrong. That’s not a sarcastic request. I’m being genuine.
      • bob33212 6y ago
        Off Chain transactions look so much like a credit card that as soon as you begin to build the off chain transaction system you see that Amex/Visa/MC could just allow customers to settle payment in BTC and get the same value.
        • tal8d 6y ago
          I'm trying to imagine how you think that'd work without them also running an exchange and eating slippage, or maintaining a massive hot wallet.
          • bob33212 6y ago
            You could make it a debit card and require people to deposit BTC. But in general the USD is a better settlement currency. That is why BTC isn't being used in transactions. BTC is a pump and dump play.
            • tal8d 6y ago
              lol, so nothing even close to an off chain network - but somehow the "same value". Well, except for the real time cryptographically secure stuff - but nobody wanted those values anyway. 10+ years is a pretty long con, that satoshi is one patient fraudster.
  • snarfy 6y ago
    The irony is we place a lot of value on energy. The current economic system reflects this with oil being a proxy for energy.
• daptaq 6y ago
  > how will Bitcoin become a usable currency It won't, it's just a speculative asset.
  • doomroot 6y ago
    I can send Bitcoin for free, instantly, trustlessly.
    • miked85 6y ago
      You are one for three.
    • Cthulhu_ 6y ago
      Bitcoin has nearly $20 transaction fees (https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_fee https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_f...) and it takes at least 10 minutes for a transfer to be confirmed (https://www.blockchain.com/charts/median-confirmation-time https://www.blockchain.com/charts/median-confirmation-time).
      • reedf1 6y ago
        I find this data fascinating - partly because I don't understand it. I regularly send bitcoin and, as far as I can tell, have never spent more than a tiny (unquantifiable in fiat, as in much less than a cent) amount on transaction fees. Can anyone more savvy chime in on the discontinuity here?
        • derivagral 6y ago
          Not an expert, but I did make my own erc20 once. Are you sending it over the network, or to someone else within a website? (eg: binance, coinbase; doesn't need to be an exchange) Do you track your transactions later? Do they get confirmed? How many confirmations does a website need to count it? How long does that take? I would expect a low-fee transaction to eventually either expire or go through. I don't know what timeframe that might take: higher fee typically means higher priority as I've understood it. I can't imagine it'd keep your $ in limbo forever, but who knows. If you haven't used it in a long time, I understand that the network is much more congested these days.
• markyc 6y ago
  that ship has sailed long ago. it is now seen as a replacement for gold and a hedge against inflation
  • base698 6y ago
    It was always a hedge on inflation. The genesis block message: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/genesis-block.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/genesis-block.asp Nakamoto instilled within the Block's raw data: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks."
    • altcognito 6y ago
      So basically the entire premise is undermining confidence in the existing system of capitalism and Democracy. "Your money isn't safe in banks", and a healthy dose of making it easier to launder money.
      • nlitened 6y ago
        Bailout for banks has nothing to do with either capitalism or democracy, as far as I understand.
        • jerry1979 6y ago
          Capitalist democracies produced the bailouts. Or maybe bread lines have nothing to do with authoritarian communism?
      • pandeiro 6y ago
        Pretty sure the existing system of capitalism and Democracy is undermining confidence in itself. Bitcoin just provides a hedge.
• ulzeraj 6y ago
  Off chain through Liquid or Lighting networks.
  • joeblau 6y ago
    The funny thing is that there is 117x more Bitcoin on Layer 2 ETH in WBTC[1] than in the lighting network[2]. $5,793,513,475.00 // WBTC (Bitcoin on Ethereum) $49,173,964.59 // Lightning [1] - https://wbtc.network/dashboard/order-book https://wbtc.network/dashboard/order-book [2] - https://1ml.com/statistics https://1ml.com/statistics
    • gruez 6y ago
      That's not surprising if you consider that tokenized BTC is often used for collateral in difi.
      • joeblau 6y ago
        used where it's useful ;)
• mettamage 6y ago
  IMO it isn't. However, I do see a huge for sending large transactions. In that sense, I don't find it too crazy that Tesla is accepting Bitcoin, because buying a Tesla is a large transaction. IMO a niche use though.
  • sheeshkebab 6y ago
    I think accepting Bitcoin as payment was tried before - it never worked since people buying it are either not selling (and using to store cash that keeps on growing), or buying it for speculative purposes via secondary instruments (gbtc, ethe). Not really sure what’s point is for Tesla but my guess its speculative for them, with an attempt to get some additional value on cash they are starting to swim in now...
    • maclured 6y ago
      > Not really sure what’s point is for Tesla Speculation and free marketing I expect
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  • kgwgk 6y ago
    Tesla isn't accepting Bitcoin.
  • alisonkisk 6y ago
    I can't see Tesla BTC as anything more than a marketing gimmick for their computer geek clientele and fan base. Even if it's a logistical disaster, they probably make it back in stock purchases from true believers.
    • ashish1521 6y ago
      Tesla tested the waters with Elon's tweets and it shook the Bitcoin and sent it to all time highs, then Tesla bought large amount of Bitcoin and now the market exploded even further. It is a marketing gimmick, true, but it is making Bitcoin more volatile and unstable, while Tesla hoards more money from Bitcoin!
• lynndotpy 6y ago
  In theory, "lightning networks", which are basically a network of open transactions across wealthy, participating nodes (e.g. banks and exchanges.) A lot of smaller transactions can piggyback on the larger transactions basically for free. I don't think these are widely used in practice yet, but I might be wrong.
  • kaba0 6y ago
    Isn’t that the point of Corda?
• charcircuit 6y ago
  It's about $7 at the moment to be included in the next block. A new block is added approximately every 10 minutes. Since bitcoin does not guarantee finality some services require you to wait for a certain amount of extra blocks after yours to reduce the chance of a change reorginaztion happening that doesn't include your transaction. Bitcoin will not function as a currency due to it's high volatility. For a more usable currency look at DAI, USDT, and USDC which are stable coins pegged to the dollar. DAI is collateralized with on chain assets where USDT and USDC are collateralized with real life assets which are mainly regular USD.
  • thargor90 6y ago
    The public does not have proof that USDT is collateralized with real life assets. I'm not sure about USDC.
    • luka-birsa 6y ago
      The public know that USDT is not fully collateralised with real life assets. This has been publicly stated on Tether page as well. So can we please stop parroting this USDT bullshit, nobody cares how tether is backed and with all the alternatives to USDT there is no reason to use it but from a perspective of ease-of-use and wider offering of trading pairs. You have DAI, USDC, TUSD, BUSD.... You can check which one is audited (USDC and TUSD) and will credit you fully if you need so. You can also work directly with USD at various reputable crypto exchanges (eg Bitstamp, Coinbase, Kraken). This tether FUD always resurfaces as price goes up as people are butthurt that they did not buy the last dip. No worries, history will repeat itself. This year we'll see BTC hit 100k+ and end the massive bull run in 250k teritory by 2022. After that we'll see everybody dumping their cash in BTC and the bubble will burst on the wings of massive FUD & regulatory bullshit. Bitcoin willl drop to ~20k and cycle will repeat. For those that weren't watching, this repeats itself every ~3 years for past 10 years. Keep watching the news... USDT stories will become more regular, next will be China bans, Russia bans... then we'll continue with EU regulation push, US regulation push, new tax laws.... The only smart thing you can do is start investing a small amount every week and forgetting about it. Cancel two lattes (or lottery cards, donuts) per week and buy BTC and ETH instead. Imagine starting doing this in 2016, when ETH was launched. You bought ETH for 1 USD. Today it's hitting ~1700 USD. You would retire easily. Too bad you're so hard at work telling the world that crypto is a scam.
• ucha 6y ago
  Buying US stocks takes 2 days to settle. Sending simple wires in the US takes hours. Last time I tried to send significant funds from France to the UK, it took me a whole week of back and forth with the bank to complete all the AML/KYC paperwork. Let's not even talk about how long it would take to move gold from one part of the world to another cf. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-30/iran-is-hauling-gold-bars-out-of-venezuela-s-almost-empty-vaults https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-30/iran-is-h... You can buy or send bitcoin in seconds if you're not trying to do it on-chain, the same way you can do it with stocks and other assets. But definitive settlement of a bitcoin transaction is faster than pretty much any other asset.
  • villasv 6y ago
    > Sending simple wires in the US takes hours. Joke is on you, though. Even Brazil now has instant wires (zero fees).
  • dan-robertson 6y ago
    I feel like Iran and Venezuela are bad examples as they are typically denied access to much of the global financial system. It’s normally pretty easy to move gold around and this process is handled by banks. Of course you might not get the same gold bars if you move gold between countries (for one thing they tend to come in different sizes in different places) and it likely won’t even be physically the same gold, but the banks tend to handle the arbitrage of taking physical gold to refineries across to move it from one market to another (though there were some worries this might break down between the US futures markets and London physical markets due to coronavirus restrictions)
  • rjsw 6y ago
    > Last time I tried to send significant funds from France to the UK, it took me a whole week of back and forth with the bank to complete all the AML/KYC paperwork. You would need to do the same paperwork with bitcoin. I have UK and French bank accounts, transfers between them take seconds. Transfers from the French account to any other Eurozone account take seconds.
    • 6y ago
• eternauta3k 6y ago
  It could become a backbone for large transactions, while side chains (Dash, Eth, etc.) provide faster, smaller transactions.
• 2pEXgD0fZ5cF 6y ago
  The last years were the strongest indicator that bitcoin will not become any kind of usable currency. Seeing that it is as volatile as ever I'm honestly not sure what bitcoin can even still become except yet another abstract plaything to "invest" (bet) money on, the very thing it has been for a while now. Also while it is decentralized, the reality of how it is used is very much not. The typical use case is buying and selling it via an exchange, not much else. Depending on where you live you have to reveal more information about yourself to "just buy bitcoin" than you have to when opening a bank account.
  • alisonkisk 6y ago
    Right or wrong, the theory is that eventually it will stabilize and then the early adopters got a reward for commiting early. This isn't so different from any network.
• joshxyz 6y ago
  For large transactions. Small transactions can be done on sidechains and other chains.
• jiriknesl 6y ago
  I use it as a currency for years. Especially for large transactions internationally, where my bank asks me+the other party to fees like $30 and it takes 3 days if everything goes well. In comparison with that, BTC for those years, gave me on average 40 minutes and $1 fee. This is thirty times better than what my bank provides.
  • alisonkisk 6y ago
    Do you feel bad that you used bitcoin to save $30 instead of speculating on it to make $30K?
    • picks_at_nits 6y ago
      This may not be the most constructive way to make the point, but this is a feature of any speculative asset. If the market as a whole has a very high confidence it will continue to rise in value, few people will want to trade it for goods and services unless they have no choice or can make even more money from the goods and services than they can from holding the asset. Otherwise, it’s like getting options in a startup and spending them on pizza.
    • jiriknesl 6y ago
      No. I don't use BTC as a speculative asset. I use it for two things: 1. when it is expensive or difficult to send money to places like Vietnam, post-soviet countries, Iran. 2. some saving in case the shit hits the fan and I will have to survive for a couple of months without TransferWise, Revolut.
  • nly 6y ago
    What countries?
    • jiriknesl 6y ago
      Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Vietnam, Iran
  • afavour 6y ago
• nannal 6y ago
  A transaction takes ~10 minutes, to ensure that the block which the transaction is included in isn't orphaned some services institute a 6 block waiting period to ensure the transaction is stable. Should the block be orphaned, the transaction will re-enter the mempool on all hosts who'd confirmed the block and should be included in a subsequent block. The transaction cost depends on the size of the transaction and the congestion in the mempool, the cost can be set by any sender depending on the urgency of the transaction.
• kkarpkkarp 6y ago
  > how will Bitcoin become a usable currency? Wake up, this question was reasonable in 2010, maybe 2015. :) Today no serious person is still thinking it would be usable :)
  • pjanoman 6y ago
    Maybe people close to Bitcoin know it won't be a usable currency, but unless you closely follow bitcoin, it sure seems like it is built to be a usable currency. Even the name implies this relationship, and the idea of a 'wallet' does too. Tesla just recently bought $1.5 billion worth for exchange, no?
• Cthulhu_ 6y ago
  It won't, but it's also not transferred as much because of cost, time, and transactions/second limit; I have no solid figures, but I wouldn't be surprised if 99% of actual bitcoin transactions are virtual, in databases on the exchanges. You can't do high frequency trading on the blockchain.
• dcolkitt 6y ago
  I have no position in Bitcoin, but isn’t it possible for “BTC scrip” to be the money used day to day. With actual blockchain transactions just being used to aggregate at the institutional level? This is pretty much the way money worked in the 19th century, just with gold instead of BTC. Nobody physically carried or transferred gold to buy a beer. They just used bank notes that were backed by a trusted intermediary holding the physical asset. It might make sense for a bank, or even a very wealthy person, to pay the cost of physically transferring the hard asset. But most just used IOUs that were backed by the underlying hard asset.
  • oliwarner 6y ago
    You're talking about a BTC bearer bond. Isn't that just what cash used to be? You've gone full circle.
  • UncleMeat 6y ago
    It could, but why? The two things that BTC grants are trustlessness and the inability to enact fiscal policy. If BTC just becomes the backing for institutions, trustlessness is gone. So then it is a question of whether a backing unit that supports fiscal policy is better than one that doesn't. I think I know what institutions would prefer.
• slazaro 6y ago
  Some of us ask ourselves the same thing. NANO, for instance, has no fees and is basically instantaneous (<1s). But unlike Bitcoin, Elon Musk isn't hyping it, and you can't make money by using computer farms, so most people don't know about it.
• csomar 6y ago
  It's already a usable currency. You overpay the fee to get your transaction confirmed in the next average 10 minutes. You use lightening (though support is still limited) to have cheap and fast confirmations and you settle later. Also, it's still faster and cheaper than an international SWIFT.
• LeoPanthera 6y ago
  "Bitcoin Cash" is a fork of Bitcoin with larger blocks to solve the transaction fee problem, which it has been largely successful at. In fact the original design for Bitcoin assumed larger blocks in the future, so it is perhaps a more accurate description to say that Bitcoin Cash is the "original" Bitcoin, and Bitcoin Core is a fork with an altered (small blocks) design.