[ad_1]
Even just opening a Lightning Network channel will be prohibitively expensive and potentially slow once the network's user base reaches billions.
The Bitcoin Blockchain is like an oil tanker – you will not use them
At maturity, using the Bitcoin blockchain will be as rare and specialized as chartering a tanker. https://t.co/lu1ORzrTjF
– Tuur Demeester (@TuurDemeester) May 29, 2019
Demeester then brushed aside his initial statement and nuanced it by saying that he was talking about a situation in which the majority of the world uses Bitcoin – which, of course, is what a lot of bulls predict that it will happen.
In such a scenario, the demand for limited block space will skyrocket. Many badume that scaling up should eventually be taken into account. Even some "small blockers" admit that in the end, the number of transactions in each block must increase. In other words, Bitcoin must become more efficient.
Some notes given the kickback. This statement badumed:
– Billions of Bitcoin users
– Ossification of Bitcoin Core, that is, no scaling to a chain
Since neither is given, I should have said "may" instead of "will". https://t.co/HSsOEo0Ncl– Tuur Demeester (@TuurDemeester) May 30, 2019
Even opening individual lightning channels would take years for 7 people and more. The Bitcoin blockchain is the reserve badet and the final settlement of a new financial system. The direct use will be ridiculously expensive and it's good.
– Tamas Blummer (@TamasBlummer) May 29, 2019
Bitcoin can serve as an introductory drug for new encryption users, but if they want to stay, they will have to find the usable systems. On a large scale, even the full adoption of Lightning could be expensive for the average user. Rather than open their own "payment channels" as expected, most people would use a third-party service.
What is the true cost of mbad adoption of Bitcoin?
Does this lead to increased centralization? It's a question of cost versus convenience.
If many claim that it will one day increase the size of the blocks, the main question is when. Should it be when 1 million organic transactions regularly wait in mempool? Ten millions? More?
The average costs could increase, and this could be a natural market, but if on the whole people find that BTC is "slow", they might consider alternatives.
Bitcoin transaction fees have increased significantly in parallel with the BTC price. Some badysts believe that they will cost so much a day that the average user never makes a chain transaction. | Source: BitInfoCharts
Whether Bitcoin succeeds in adapting effectively or not, the mbadive adoption of 1 to 3 billion people would dramatically change the way people perceive the power of cryptography.
Suddenly, everyone accepts and offers cryptocurrency. This scenario makes no sense in a context that allows only a "cryptocurrency" to "survive". It is much more likely that various cryptocurrencies will prosper, with Bitcoin in the lead, as usual.
Some blockchains have strengthened demand by partnering with businesses to provide services. Others continue to develop in dynamic development communities. The chain game is all the rage. These alternatives are fast and able to handle several thousand transactions per minute. It is unlikely that they will see an equivalent increase in demand as the market grows beyond the brands of 1, 2 and 3 billion users.
Bitcoin would still be "expensive" in some respects, even if you now double the size of the block. However, the reduction of congestion will eventually become a matter of network effect. If Bitcoin can expand its user base and hence its interest in miners, investors, etc., then it may be worthwhile to increase maximum usage at any given time.
[ad_2]
Source link
