5 ms·
Per-transaction basis is completely meaningless math. Both systems can be scaled as I said. The point is that it's more expensive to run the US dollar system th
by Geee 6y ago
Per-transaction basis is completely meaningless math. Both systems can be scaled as I said. The point is that it's more expensive to run the US dollar system than Bitcoin.
- arcticbull 6y agoWell ok do you have any basis for that or is that speculation?
- ashtonkem 6y agoPer-transactions costs matter a lot, you can’t just hand wave that away if you’re hoping to actually persuade anyone. As far as scaling Bitcoin goes: prove it. It’s been a decade and it still does 4tps.
- Geee 6y agohttps://www.binance.com/en/cards https://www.binance.com/en/cards
- ashtonkem 6y agoPointing to a Visa card to solve crypto scaling is probably not the argument I’d go for.
- Geee 6y agoThat's exactly how the Bitcoin's payment layer scales. Visa is just one solution, but that's probably the most popular one. The settlement layer doesn't have to scale, because it's possible to scale the payment layer. You get all the benefits of sound money with the usability of fiat money.
- ashtonkem 6y agoIt scales by using the system that Bitcoin was supposed to replace? Again, that’s not an argument for Bitcoin, just so we’re clear. This is an argument for visa instead.
- uh-quan 6y ago>As far as scaling Bitcoin goes: prove it. It’s been a decade and it still does 4tps. Sure. The Lightning Network already exists, is working and in use, and can in principle do essentially unlimited TPS. Bitcoin doesn't need to scale to millions of TPS to be successful (since payments and microtransactions aren't its only use case), but it so happens that it can do that through second layer technologies.
- panarky 6y agoPer-transaction is only meaningful if you believe Bitcoin's only utility is by competing with Visa for everyday transactions like buying a cup of coffee. But if you find that Bitcoin is a digital, permissionless, borderless, uncensorable store of value, a better gold than gold, then it doesn't need millions of transactions per second. Bitcoin is just fine as the most secure settlement layer and long-term store of value for large, infrequent and expensive transactions. Fiat money isn't going anywhere, Visa doesn't need to be replaced, and Bitcoin doesn't need to pay for your coffee to be useful. It can do what it does best, coexisting with fiat systems and other cryptocurrencies.
- arcticbull 6y ago> Bitcoin is just fine as the most secure settlement layer and long-term store of value for large, infrequent and expensive transactions. It's not, because its inability to scale means folks are pushed onto L2 which has none of the guarantees you mention.
- panarky 6y agoIf I buy real estate or fine art to defend against the money printer, my transactions are large, infrequent, slow and expensive. As Bitcoin's use as a store of value increases and transaction throughput remains constant, transactions will be larger, less frequent and more expensive. I won't get pushed out onto L2 just like I'm not pushed to liquidate real estate or art collections. I don't transact in long-term stores of value more than once every few years, and then I expect the transaction will be large, slow and expensive.
- Geee 6y agoThese guarantees aren't needed for most daily transactions. Using Visa with Bitcoin is fine, and does not undermine the security of the currency.
- arcticbull 6y agoYour absolute right, those guarantees are not needed in most circumstances, which is why bitcoin is irrelevant.