Author

Topic: [2017-10-24] Why Does Bitcoin Fail As a Payment System? (Read 2772 times)

legendary
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1481
Why do morons underestimate Segwit and Lightning?

Not to mention atomic swaps and all the other improvements in the pipe.

I guess short attention span syndrome is a real thing. They should probably refrain from writing "articles" that make their shortcomings that obvious.

Because Average Joe has to be fooled by these people. He shall not understand the real power of the Bitcoin protocol! Think about "smart"phones: these are really powerful things and you probably know better than me for what they are used the most. Bitcoin is not for everybody and I hope it will stay this way
legendary
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1091
Why do morons underestimate Segwit and Lightning?

If people don't know what Bitcoin is, how are they supposed to understand the implementations that eventually will run on top of Bitcoin? It's obvious that these articles are written by simple minded people who don't know how to think further than what they know, or more precisely said, think to know. To make things even worse, this article has a massive bias to it, which makes it stink badly -- it wouldn't acually surprise me if this article is paid for (i.e. sponsored).
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 535
As for me, the Bitcoin Payment System is by far its only flaw. If this could be corrected, surely Bitcoin users will invest on it more considering its fast money transaction processes. The reason behind this failure, as I see it, is because a lot of jurisdictions have blocked its access. Mind you, there are a lot of external factors that are far beyond the control of Bitcoins' failure as a payment system. As you know, many are still against Bitcoins. And, it is not disputed that up now, Bitcoins are still unregulated and thus explains the sluggish payment system.

If only we can vote for a point person to regulate Bitcoins in order to address this pressing issue.. But I do not think it is possible knowing clearly that this community is all for anonymity. How can we vote for someone we do not even know? How can we entrust someone we do not even know? All these are clearly real problems that Bitcoins face. 
legendary
Activity: 2408
Merit: 1121
Why do morons underestimate Segwit and Lightning?

Not to mention atomic swaps and all the other improvements in the pipe.

I guess short attention span syndrome is a real thing. They should probably refrain from writing "articles" that make their shortcomings that obvious.
hero member
Activity: 490
Merit: 501
This is a good analysis actually and we should be sending this to all Bitcoin leaders we have in the Bitcoin community. One of the flawed assumption (or maybe still unfulfilled) by Nakamoto when he left the scene is that there would eventually be good leaders who will be providing the vision as to where is Bitcoin heading to. Unlike with Ethereum, Bitcoin is essentially headless which some argue can also be the real design of Bitcoin. Now, that there is a big challenge to reduce its transaction costs and speed up the process, the Bitcoin community is not that united in dealing with the problems instead we are gifted with two hard forks (with so much fats in between). I am still hopeful that soon we can come up with better solutions to scale things up to make Bitcoin not just a store of value but also as real currency to be used for daily buy and sell.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 263


Right back from when Satoshi Nakamoto wrote the white paper on Bitcoin, he envisaged it as a payment system and a currency that would operate totally online. However, since its early days, a lot has happened, and Bitcoin’s core function has shifted substantially away from that ideal.

Many now see and use Bitcoin as a store of value, and it has become an investor’s dream as its volatility is mostly projected upwards, gaining hugely compared to any other asset out there.

But as a payment system, Bitcoin is still heavily flawed, and there are core issues that are stopping its growth in this direction. Bitcoin’s scalability is being hampered because it is too slow and expensive relative to more conventional payment processing platforms.
Cost of transactions

Analysts at Bank of America Merrill Lynch have weighed into the debate around Bitcoin’s role in the global financial system.

Their first port of call was the Bitcoin transactions, which is the fee miners charge to validate a Blockchain transaction.

In the first quarter of 2017, the fee was $2.40 per transaction — up significantly from $0.024 cents in Q4 2016.

“One of the reasons there is a fee is because the larger the transaction data size, the longer and more energy it will take miners to validate the data,” Analysts at Bank of America Merrill Lynch said.

    “Fees are not strictly enforced like transaction fees in normal banking, but if you don’t include appropriate fees, there is a serious risk that a transaction won’t be processed by a miner.”

The economics of mining are complicated and necessary, but they are playing their part in slowing the adoption of Bitcoin as a payment system.

Right now, the reward for each new block mined on the Blockchain is 12.5 Bitcoin. At current prices, that’s around $75,000.

According to the analysts, there are around 2,000 Bitcoin transactions in each block mined so based on that information, a baseline price of $37.50 ($75,000/2,000) per transaction can be derived.

While not calculating specific figures, the analysts said it's likely the mining reward factors into the real economic cost of a Bitcoin transaction.
Speed of transactions

Looking deeper into the data, the analysts also examined transaction speeds. They came up with a wait time average of about 10 minutes for the 300,000 transactions per day.

They also compared this to Visa’s payment system which processes an average of 2,000 transactions per second, with a maximum capability of 56,000 per second.

“Assuming 20,000 retail transactions are processed every second, it would take about 100 minutes for one second’s worth of transactions to be processed on the Bitcoin Blockchain,” the analysts said.

That suggests significant speed upgrades will need to be developed before Bitcoin can be meaningfully adopted as a payments platform.

Comparing costs, analysts said standard transactions fees for transaction processors such as Visa and Mastercard range from 0.2 percent to five percent depending on factors such as the merchant’s size and location.

So taking into account Bitcoin’s $2.40 transaction fee plus the 0.20 percent charge applicable in the incumbent industry, the analysts said the minimum size of a transaction would have to be $1,200 for Bitcoin to break even.
In conclusion

The analysts at Merrill Lynch thus concluded that Bitcoin is a wonderful proof of concept for the underlying technology, which is the Blockchain.

“However, so far it looks to have not made much headway in its obvious agenda, to provide a ‘purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash.’”


https://cointelegraph.com/news/why-does-bitcoin-fail-as-a-payment-system
Jump to: