4 ms·

> It's not a failure because Bitcoin tanked (relatively), it's a failure because Bitcoin tanking was and will always be a significant risk. A lot of the risk c

> It's not a failure because Bitcoin tanked (relatively), it's a failure because Bitcoin tanking was and will always be a significant risk. A lot of the risk can be hedged by custodians, so I don't agree. The reason it should fail for transactions is because Bitcoin sucks for transactions. Few people will prefer slow, irreversible and expensive transactions.

VMG 4y ago
Those that need unstoppable transactions are willing to pay the 10'000 satoshi fee on a transaction with arbitrary amount.
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  Which users actually need and want irreversible transactions. What's the utility of a system that doesn't let you combat fraud?
  - VMG 4y ago
    people targeted by law enforcement or secret police need unstoppable transactions
  - yellowapple 4y ago
    A system with a middleman capable of reversing transactions enables fraud. See also: the folks behind Flipper Zero being permanently robbed of more than a million USD thanks to PayPal's whims (as the latest of a long list of high-profile cases of PayPal taking vendors' money and running).
plebianRube 4y ago
Lightning is popular because few prefer slow transactions. El Salvador primarily uses lightning network, same network Strike uses for instant cross border payments.
- hackerlight 4y ago
  Of course, I stand corrected about that. So, aside from irreversibility of transactions, what is preventing adoption?
  - adastra22 4y ago
    Setting up lightning channels are still slow, expensive, and worse require hot, online wallets.
  - plebianRube 4y ago
    I don't have time to thoroughly research the topic and come back to you, so maybe you can do some leg work. But I do know people over estimate what can be accomplished in a year and underestimate what can be accomplished in 10.
    - MrMan 4y ago
      also correlation doesn't equal causation, the Overton window, etc
  - spiralx 4y ago
    It doesn't even use that, the Chivo wallet only uses LN for external transactions, everything else is a plain old centralised app.

VMG 4y ago

Those that need unstoppable transactions are willing to pay the 10'000 satoshi fee on a transaction with arbitrary amount.

mrguyorama 4y ago
Which users actually need and want irreversible transactions. What's the utility of a system that doesn't let you combat fraud?
- VMG 4y ago
  people targeted by law enforcement or secret police need unstoppable transactions
- yellowapple 4y ago
  A system with a middleman capable of reversing transactions enables fraud. See also: the folks behind Flipper Zero being permanently robbed of more than a million USD thanks to PayPal's whims (as the latest of a long list of high-profile cases of PayPal taking vendors' money and running).

plebianRube 4y ago

Lightning is popular because few prefer slow transactions. El Salvador primarily uses lightning network, same network Strike uses for instant cross border payments.

hackerlight 4y ago
Of course, I stand corrected about that. So, aside from irreversibility of transactions, what is preventing adoption?
- adastra22 4y ago
  Setting up lightning channels are still slow, expensive, and worse require hot, online wallets.
- plebianRube 4y ago
  I don't have time to thoroughly research the topic and come back to you, so maybe you can do some leg work. But I do know people over estimate what can be accomplished in a year and underestimate what can be accomplished in 10.
  - MrMan 4y ago
    also correlation doesn't equal causation, the Overton window, etc
- spiralx 4y ago
  It doesn't even use that, the Chivo wallet only uses LN for external transactions, everything else is a plain old centralised app.