RE: Is Bitcoin A Path To Tyranny?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Bitcoin fees are not going up over time which is a primary condition of this thesis.
Until Bitcoin fees actually go up and stay up anyone can use BTC, even poor people.
Also all other blockchains evolved as a direct result of Bitcoin.
It is an insult to assume otherwise.
So even if Bitcoin get's co-opted we still have all these other protocols to play with.
And that's because Bitcoin exists.
To frame it within this new narrative is a conflict of interest that nobody should take seriously because every path leads back to "here's why you should buy my token".
Then again I'm guessing you already saw the discussion on Twitter.
So I'm repeating myself.
0
0
0.000
Couldn’t say it better myself! 💯
OK, BTC fees remain low. That is what you are staking this on?
You are the first bitcoiner I have heard say this. If the fees remain low, good for the world. Ill happily be the first person in crypto to say i was wrong about the fees on BTC.
That would be a bad guess.
Haha I thought it might be.
Oh well these things happen.
Guesses by their nature are shots in the dark. LOL
Saw your comment, thought I'd weigh in:
Your argument about BTC fees here ...
... falls flat because there are relatively few BTC transactions per block. If the Bitcoin network would have to process as many transactions as for example the Solana protocol, then watch Bitcoin's transaction fees skyrocket.
The main reason there are so relatively few Bitcoin transactions in my opinion is its fixed supply and incrementally decreased flow over time (block reward halvings), which causes people to hoard and not spend their Bitcoin as they expect the value to increase over time. In that regard Bitcoin has thus far failed its original objective, being to serve as digital money.
ps, do not get me wrong here, I am and have been a long-time Bitcoin supporter but I 100% agree here with @taskmaster4450 in that Bitcoin's PoW protocol incentivizes network centralisation which over time converges to only 1 majority miner controlling > 50% of hashrate.
Right well you just completely undermined your own argument by making a comparison to Solana... the most centralized VC chain that constantly halts. How could Solana of all things be the solution to decentralization?
As pristine collateral Bitcoin isn't supposed to exchange hands often by design. It's supposed to be an antifragile network that never goes down and can take any beating that gets thrown at it. The use-cause of Solana isn't even comparable to that in any way.
The data being presented to us is incontestable. We all collectively decided in 2017 when price was around $15k that $50 fees were unacceptable and going to be a problem. Now we are trading at $70k and the cost of fees should be much higher in theory. They are not. I did a Bitcoin operation yesterday for $3. Our hypothesis was proven incorrect, and yet many of us have refused to admit it and carry on making assumptions based on the hypothesis being true, which we already know it isn't after 7 years of in-the-field testing.