5 ms·

Also bitcoin != crypto, those are not even subset/superset for the most part. Bitcoin solves one single problem of "digital cash" with the most robust and bori

Also bitcoin != crypto, those are not even subset/superset for the most part. Bitcoin solves one single problem of "digital cash" with the most robust and boring mechanism (known to mankind so far). While the "cryptos" aim at satisfying demand for all sorts of p2p apps and moneymaking schemes that can be funded with the digital cash to avoid getting regulated out of existence.

pavlov 4y ago
It’s practically impossible to use Bitcoin as digital cash because it’s so slow and expensive. That was the original problem it purported to solve, but it failed miserably at that.
- barnabee 4y ago
  So far. If you spend any time in the research community you’ll realise that those problems are very likely to get solved. Lightning alone probably gets us there. Its volatility and UX, as well as how negatively it is perceived currently (by some people) look like bigger blockers to me.
  - rvz 4y ago
    > Lightning alone probably gets us there. Which that is not Bitcoin and neither is it on-chain. The parent comment is correct on Bitcoin's failure as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system and all it is instead, is a store of value. This is how you know it has failed in its intended purpose.
  - redox99 4y ago
    What advancements have happened regarding lightning? Last I heard about lightning was around 2017, and 5 years later it doesn't really seem to have gained much adoption.
    - saalweachter 4y ago
      Fun fact: the Lightning whitepaper is now older than the Bitcoin whitepaper was when the former was published.
  - technobach 4y ago
    The US adult population is ~250 million. With Bitcoin's ~300k transactions/day, it would take over 2 years for each of them to simply open a LN channel, if we dedicate the entire network just to onboarding. Lightning will definitely not solve it. edit: tps -> transactions/day
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    Ligthning is an alternative to Bitcoin, not a fix for it. It has a different security model (much much much weaker), it uses entirely different technology, it is essentially centralized. The fact that it uses Bitcoin on the back end is mostly a detail of Lightning.
    - adastra22 4y ago
      There is literally not a single thing true in this comment. I would advise you seriously revaluate where you are getting your (mis)information from. Lightning is a way of using bitcoin. A way of cooperatively creating bitcoin transactions with multiple parties, in such a way that you can minimize the number of on-chain transactions required. It is bitcoin. It has the same security model as bitcoin. It uses the same technology. It is not in any way centralized (it's a p2p network of payment channel connections, with each operator running their own server).
      - imtringued 4y ago
        Lightning is a decentralised PayPal equivalent. Nothing more nothing less.
      - tsimionescu 4y ago
        If you and I have a lightning node and a channel between us, and I send 1 BTC to you, this transaction is NOT secured by the bitcoin network, nor any similar technology. It's basically just a regular ledger that my node and yours keep track of (there's a little more cryptography in place, but not much more). Even worse, if you saw my transaction, then sent me 1BTC worth of goods, then your node becomes offline and I forcefully close the channel with the original balance, I still have my 1BTC and there is no proof anywhere except your node that the transaction ever happened. So no security, unless both nodes are online. Finally, unless you open direct channels with everyone you want to transact with, you will rely on a 3rd party node that does have such a channel. In practice, this likely means you will use one of a few major nodes that you trust to stay online and not refuse transactions, so the payments are in effect highly centralized.
- alangibson 4y ago
  Every time one makes the point that Bitcoin has no real utility, someone says 'Lightning network'. Does anyone know if it's getting any adoption?
  - sexangel 4y ago
    not entirely sure, but there appears to be investment from old-school banking, so that could be its on ramp into the classical financial sector. oh yeah, & this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BZoKH-hX_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BZoKH-hX_o but yeah, bitcoin has no utility. you'd just have to wait until The Merge inevitably occurs, or use any of the few PoS cryptocurrencies that are generally better & more capable than bitcoin in every capacity, like Avalanche, Cardano, Fantom, Solana, etc.
    - MrMan 4y ago
      Algorand
  - xiphias2 4y ago
    At this point it can be used for payments practically everywhere where Bitcoin accepted, but it’s not yet practical for payments over $100 as far as I know, so I still only use the base Bitcoin layer for paying for my travels. There are new algorithms in late research phase though for much larger payments (like $5000) that are expected to go into production this year. I’m waiting for that before switching to using lightning network. For people in the US though they can just go into a Walmart or McDonald’s and use it right now.
    - beefield 4y ago
      > For people in the US though they can just go into a Walmart or McDonald’s and use it right now. Am I right to assume that "use" here is in the same sense[1] that you can "use" "dollars" to pay your Big Mac in Paris with your US credit card? I.e. French McDonald's does not set the price in dollars but euros and does not need to touch dollars with a ten foot pole during the whole process and receives euros in their account? [1] Which hardly makes any sense to me, to be honest.
- londons_explore 4y ago
  A bitcoin transaction to be processed sometime in the next 24 hours costs $0.15 right now. That competes pretty well with many bank transfer methods, especially international, which still take many days and cost sometimes $20+.
  - pavlov 4y ago
    Cash settles immediately. "Sometime in the next 24 hours" is not digital cash. Not to mention that Bitcoin is so volatile that the transaction's value in real-world currency may be 10% higher or lower within that 24-hour window, and of course you still need to pay someone to convert it into money if you're not planning on being a crypto holder.
  - derriz 4y ago
    That's not really a fair comparison. Bitcoin cannot has very limited use for actual commerce - actually paying for stuff. So you also need to consider the inconvenience, complexity and cost of trading the received BTC for local currency. I haven't paid anything for international transfers within the SEPA area for years. Depending on the source/destination bank, the transfer can be completed within an hour or so. Sometimes the solution is simply better banking infrastructure. The banking/payments system in the US is a mess but it doesn't have to be so.
  - happymellon 4y ago
    It really doesn't. Bank transfers do not cost me and happen instantaneous, not 24 hours. I can also transfer to the US, and they receive it in 24 hours. It still doesn't cost me.
yakak 4y ago
bitcoin != crypto Right, e-banking is crypto. The field of Speculative Blockchain solutions is a tiny part of crypto. But your examples sound like they either are or anchor to speculative Blockchains so Bitcoin is the leading implementation of infrastructure for your examples.

pavlov 4y ago

It’s practically impossible to use Bitcoin as digital cash because it’s so slow and expensive. That was the original problem it purported to solve, but it failed miserably at that.

barnabee 4y ago
So far. If you spend any time in the research community you’ll realise that those problems are very likely to get solved. Lightning alone probably gets us there. Its volatility and UX, as well as how negatively it is perceived currently (by some people) look like bigger blockers to me.
- rvz 4y ago
  > Lightning alone probably gets us there. Which that is not Bitcoin and neither is it on-chain. The parent comment is correct on Bitcoin's failure as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system and all it is instead, is a store of value. This is how you know it has failed in its intended purpose.
- redox99 4y ago
  What advancements have happened regarding lightning? Last I heard about lightning was around 2017, and 5 years later it doesn't really seem to have gained much adoption.
  - saalweachter 4y ago
    Fun fact: the Lightning whitepaper is now older than the Bitcoin whitepaper was when the former was published.
- technobach 4y ago
  The US adult population is ~250 million. With Bitcoin's ~300k transactions/day, it would take over 2 years for each of them to simply open a LN channel, if we dedicate the entire network just to onboarding. Lightning will definitely not solve it. edit: tps -> transactions/day
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  Ligthning is an alternative to Bitcoin, not a fix for it. It has a different security model (much much much weaker), it uses entirely different technology, it is essentially centralized. The fact that it uses Bitcoin on the back end is mostly a detail of Lightning.
  - adastra22 4y ago
    There is literally not a single thing true in this comment. I would advise you seriously revaluate where you are getting your (mis)information from. Lightning is a way of using bitcoin. A way of cooperatively creating bitcoin transactions with multiple parties, in such a way that you can minimize the number of on-chain transactions required. It is bitcoin. It has the same security model as bitcoin. It uses the same technology. It is not in any way centralized (it's a p2p network of payment channel connections, with each operator running their own server).
    - imtringued 4y ago
      Lightning is a decentralised PayPal equivalent. Nothing more nothing less.
    - tsimionescu 4y ago
      If you and I have a lightning node and a channel between us, and I send 1 BTC to you, this transaction is NOT secured by the bitcoin network, nor any similar technology. It's basically just a regular ledger that my node and yours keep track of (there's a little more cryptography in place, but not much more). Even worse, if you saw my transaction, then sent me 1BTC worth of goods, then your node becomes offline and I forcefully close the channel with the original balance, I still have my 1BTC and there is no proof anywhere except your node that the transaction ever happened. So no security, unless both nodes are online. Finally, unless you open direct channels with everyone you want to transact with, you will rely on a 3rd party node that does have such a channel. In practice, this likely means you will use one of a few major nodes that you trust to stay online and not refuse transactions, so the payments are in effect highly centralized.
alangibson 4y ago
Every time one makes the point that Bitcoin has no real utility, someone says 'Lightning network'. Does anyone know if it's getting any adoption?
- sexangel 4y ago
  not entirely sure, but there appears to be investment from old-school banking, so that could be its on ramp into the classical financial sector. oh yeah, & this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BZoKH-hX_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BZoKH-hX_o but yeah, bitcoin has no utility. you'd just have to wait until The Merge inevitably occurs, or use any of the few PoS cryptocurrencies that are generally better & more capable than bitcoin in every capacity, like Avalanche, Cardano, Fantom, Solana, etc.
  - MrMan 4y ago
    Algorand
- xiphias2 4y ago
  At this point it can be used for payments practically everywhere where Bitcoin accepted, but it’s not yet practical for payments over $100 as far as I know, so I still only use the base Bitcoin layer for paying for my travels. There are new algorithms in late research phase though for much larger payments (like $5000) that are expected to go into production this year. I’m waiting for that before switching to using lightning network. For people in the US though they can just go into a Walmart or McDonald’s and use it right now.
  - beefield 4y ago
    > For people in the US though they can just go into a Walmart or McDonald’s and use it right now. Am I right to assume that "use" here is in the same sense[1] that you can "use" "dollars" to pay your Big Mac in Paris with your US credit card? I.e. French McDonald's does not set the price in dollars but euros and does not need to touch dollars with a ten foot pole during the whole process and receives euros in their account? [1] Which hardly makes any sense to me, to be honest.
londons_explore 4y ago
A bitcoin transaction to be processed sometime in the next 24 hours costs $0.15 right now. That competes pretty well with many bank transfer methods, especially international, which still take many days and cost sometimes $20+.
- pavlov 4y ago
  Cash settles immediately. "Sometime in the next 24 hours" is not digital cash. Not to mention that Bitcoin is so volatile that the transaction's value in real-world currency may be 10% higher or lower within that 24-hour window, and of course you still need to pay someone to convert it into money if you're not planning on being a crypto holder.
- derriz 4y ago
  That's not really a fair comparison. Bitcoin cannot has very limited use for actual commerce - actually paying for stuff. So you also need to consider the inconvenience, complexity and cost of trading the received BTC for local currency. I haven't paid anything for international transfers within the SEPA area for years. Depending on the source/destination bank, the transfer can be completed within an hour or so. Sometimes the solution is simply better banking infrastructure. The banking/payments system in the US is a mess but it doesn't have to be so.
- happymellon 4y ago
  It really doesn't. Bank transfers do not cost me and happen instantaneous, not 24 hours. I can also transfer to the US, and they receive it in 24 hours. It still doesn't cost me.

yakak 4y ago

bitcoin != crypto Right, e-banking is crypto. The field of Speculative Blockchain solutions is a tiny part of crypto. But your examples sound like they either are or anchor to speculative Blockchains so Bitcoin is the leading implementation of infrastructure for your examples.