> Bitcoin's volatility is a problem, but widespread adoption (or adding a stablecoin/altcoin) would mitigate that issue. There is an extremely large audience w

> Bitcoin's volatility is a problem, but widespread adoption (or adding a stablecoin/altcoin) would mitigate that issue. There is an extremely large audience within the crypto space that uses stablecoins (as you mentioned) and treats the base currency as inventory to be used as fuel to process transactions. It is currently a $100bn market with high daily volume. Our entire society is familiar with volatile prices of fuel and we don't transact directly in it. It is strange to me that - 12 years into this - people are still leaning on the base units as being the payment method itself and worried about how the volatility could work in economic theory. Its not an argument. If you want it to be an argument, then add the theoretical hedging capabilities with some kind of micro-futures contract that neutralizes volatility for the user. Merchants already hedge or autoliquidate via their own crypto payment processor. But volatility as an issue is simply not an argument. The technology is waaaaay past that. The zenith of the base unit's scarcity and use comes from the small fractions of it used in each layer1 transaction.