The "flaws" the Economist claims to have found in Bitcoins are not really flaws, I think. There are challenges, but they're not unsolvable as the article seems to claim.
And among the "flaws" mentioned there is nothing new:
- Scalability: Is a real problem, but LN isn't the only idea to solve it; LN may work great for small transactions, and for middle-to-large sized ones other ideas like sidechains could be used.
- Energy use: Is currently a problem but renewables-based mining will probably very soon predominate (in all countries where grid parity for solar/wind energy has been reached, which make already a nice number). Renewables-based mining could even become a driving force for innovations in solar/wind energy.
- Volatility: this is maybe the most difficult one to tackle. As an example for a stablecoin the Economist mentions Tether, which is a centralized stablecoin and thus its "flaw" (to be not completely backed) has to be expected. It would be more serious if the article also mentioned coins like Dai. And I think there are also other ideas worth trying, even if they wouldn't achieve fiat-like stability in the short term, they may do so in the long term.
- Scams: This cannot be viewed as a "flaw". Or is fiat flawed because there are fiat scams?
Topic: [2019-03-28] The Economist: Bitcoin revival unlikely.... - page 3. (Read 656 times)
Is Bitcoin Fundamentally Incapable of Mass Adoption? The Economist Thinks So.
An article out today in the Economist lists several reasons why Bitcoin may never have a “long-lasting” recovery. The unnamed author writes, in part:
He or she neglects to mention that Bitcoin has previously been one of the best performing assets as well. An interesting point to make: Bitcoin over the past three years has been the best and worst performing asset to hold. Those who called the bubble and jumped ship at the top have laughed all the way to the bank, while long-term philosophical hodlers remain unfazed.
The article makes a legitimate argument that mass adoption of Bitcoin may never be forthcoming. If we view Bitcoin as a “currency,” intended for making payments of all sizes, the technology to do so hasn’t arrived yet. Bitcoin Core supporters believe expanding block size is unreasonably burdensome on miners and full nodes, while Bitcoin Cash supporters point out that even Lightning Network may not be best suited for making micro-payments.
The Economist speaks to the nature of Bitcoin’s actual transaction volume and notes a recent falsified report about the amount of value actually processed by the Bitcoin blockchain in 2018.
<....>
Read:
https://www.ccn.com/is-bitcoin-fundamentally-incapable-of-mass-adoption-the-economist-thinks-so
The Economist:
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2019/03/28/flaws-in-bitcoin-make-a-lasting-revival-unlikely
An article out today in the Economist lists several reasons why Bitcoin may never have a “long-lasting” recovery. The unnamed author writes, in part:
Quote
“The bust has been correspondingly brutal. Those who bought near the top were left with one of the world’s worst-performing assets. Cryptocurrency startups fired employees; banks shelved their products. On March 14th the CBOE said it would soon stop offering Bitcoin futures.”
He or she neglects to mention that Bitcoin has previously been one of the best performing assets as well. An interesting point to make: Bitcoin over the past three years has been the best and worst performing asset to hold. Those who called the bubble and jumped ship at the top have laughed all the way to the bank, while long-term philosophical hodlers remain unfazed.
The article makes a legitimate argument that mass adoption of Bitcoin may never be forthcoming. If we view Bitcoin as a “currency,” intended for making payments of all sizes, the technology to do so hasn’t arrived yet. Bitcoin Core supporters believe expanding block size is unreasonably burdensome on miners and full nodes, while Bitcoin Cash supporters point out that even Lightning Network may not be best suited for making micro-payments.
The Economist speaks to the nature of Bitcoin’s actual transaction volume and notes a recent falsified report about the amount of value actually processed by the Bitcoin blockchain in 2018.
<....>
Read:
https://www.ccn.com/is-bitcoin-fundamentally-incapable-of-mass-adoption-the-economist-thinks-so
The Economist:
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2019/03/28/flaws-in-bitcoin-make-a-lasting-revival-unlikely
Jump to: