Topic: Bitcoin adoption slowing; Coinbase + Bitpay is enough to make Bitcoin a fiat (Read 67202 times)

It will still be some time before we reach that scale.
Apple was even pulling out bitcoin apps from its store last year. Iphone users were unable to send bitcoin from their phones.

The Blockstream white paper mentions interoperability, but afaics gives no details other than to say the chains share the same BTC unit.

I assume this means each side chain's money supply will fluctuate according to spending from one chain to the other and presumably not passing back through the Bitcoin blockchain as I had assumed. I suppose this is viable and what remains of my criticism is there is no investment model possible for the side chains unless there is some fee service that can be sold. So I guess the devs of a side chain would need seek their ROI by charging transaction fees but ongoing payment is a form of centralization.

I guess one could view moving BTC from the Bitcoin blockchain to a side chain as an investment in an ecosystem driving the value of BTC higher. Appreciation of the particular side chain will not be possible to capture.

The investment model concerns I think strongly disfavor side chains for any ubiquitous features. Thus side chains don't appear to do anything for the scaling problem of Bitcoin.

Side chains would be useful for isolating blockchain scripting where user programmability is the priority and not investment ROI.

Also I think my interoperability concern remains valid in at least one way. For example Monero as a side chain would presumably have different anonymity properties when spending to another chain than spending within the Monero side chain. Thus the interoperability doesn't scale the same as a single chain with ubiquitous features.

I potentially like side chains as a way of achieving hard forks democratically, i.e. anyone can stay with the old chain or spend off to the new chain (and come back anytime), but this could encourage fragmentation which could retard value appreciation.

I just don't think side chains address scaling and Gregory should either justify how they do or accept that isn't the market he needs to defend with this block size debate.

Edit: there is one way side chains enable scaling. That is the side chain is a centralized ledger. So if the masses can be enticed to spend their BTC into the Coinbase+Paypal+Circle cartel side chain, then it can scale easily. And then the hashrate of the Bitcoin blockchain will wane and can be attacked by the cartel.

Yeah a cartel side chain is great sell out to TPTB. Go! Good job!

Blockstream is (unwittingly?) enabling an easy path for the cartel to fork Bitcoin.

...Bitcoin is on it's way to becoming not REALLY a FIAT...

If the economy-of-scale is sufficient (i.e. 100s of millions of users, not the paltry 1 - 2 million Bitcoin has after 6 years) the necessary hardware will be integrated into the smart phones. Then it will simply work plug-and-play for n00bs.

By those terms, a big precentage of bitcoin users are average joes and could be robbed easily...

Who's gonna educate dem average joes? Besides that I don't think real average joes even know what bitcoin is right now.

I think the only way bitcoin adoption can really grow at this point is only if BTC become useful for something. Nobody wants to invest on something such risky now.

I think the only way bitcoin adoption can really grow at this point is only if BTC become useful for something. Nobody wants to invest on something such risky now.

You are picking arbitrary dates.  You are picking your www date as "launched to the public-at-large" but picking your Bitcoin date from the genesis block.  A equally valid start date for www would be: "In 1989, while working at CERN, Tim Berners-Lee invented a network-based implementation of the hypertext concept. By releasing his invention to public use, he ensured the technology would become widespread.", or even Gopher or the creation of arpa-net itself.

Your supposed experience caused you to completely miss the Bitcoin bull market of 2012/2013 IIRC so your crystal-ball has exactly zero credibility

Cross-posting...


I am much more experienced than you in analyzing market demographics. I knew the following intuitively before I even Googled to verify it.

Bitcoin is nearing 6 years old. The World Wide Web was launched to the public-at-large in 1993. By the 6-7th year, the dot.com bubble had a capitalization that was 183% of the USA GDP!!!

I also see much confirmation that Bitcoin is not being adopted by most of those who hear about it

The ratio today is 115.1% of the $16 trillion GDP. In the year 2000, just before the market cracked in the dot-com bubble, the market capitalization was 183% times the GDP, according to a chart published recently.

And in 2007, just as the housing credit bubble was bursting, the ratio was 135% times the GDP. These are all times when the stock market looks overvalued.

42% of Americans Know What Bitcoin is

According to a new Bloomberg poll, 42% of Americans know that bitcoin is a digital currency.

However, the majority of the US residents quizzed still don’t know what bitcoin actually is.

Those who were familiar with the cryptocurrency said they were still unsure what to make of it. In fact, many who were asked had questions for the pollsters too.

Those that do know, don’t know much

Of the people who had heard of bitcoin, some were hesitant to use it themselves, either in a business or personal capacity.

Olga Ruff, a 62-year-old businesswoman, said she was unlikely to start accepting bitcoin in her small jewellery shop. “What use would it be for me?” she said, adding: “I’m not sure what the value of it is, and what I’d be able to exchange it for.”

Jeremy Labadie, an internet security specialist, said he would have to consider his options further before making a purchase: “I don’t necessarily know if it’s something I would think about using.”

However Labadie also admitted that he had considered buying some bitcoins as a long-term investment.

Other respondents said they heard about bitcoin through mainstream news coverage. In turn, this had given them an idea of the currency’s drawbacks as well as bitcoin-related scams and crimes.

...

Bitcoin: Xbox game or iPhone app?

More than 1,000 people took part in the poll and some answers were rather amusing.

A total of 46% said they do not know what bitcoin is. Suprisingly, 6% of participants thought bitcoin was an Xbox game, while another 6% were convinced it was an iOS app on the iPhone.

Unsurprisingly, the poll found that people under the age of 35 were more likely to know a thing or two about bitcoin.

The average Bitcoin user used to be a non-religious male with libertarian/anarcho-capitalist leanings, 31.2 years of age, with a job and a full-time relationship, according to a self-selecting community survey done last year by tech/economics blog Simulacrum.

...

Hispanic-Americans were by far the ethnic group most likely to say they would consider using Bitcoin themselves: 23% answered they were “very likely,” compared to 9% from African-Americans and “others” and just 5% from whites.

Though it may be presumptuous to draw definitive conclusions from the survey, a clear inference about the results may be that Hispanic-Americans have begun to pick up on Bitcoin’s exciting implication for the remittance market: a low-cost method for diaspora members to send money back home.

Bitcoin-based remittance companies have been exploding especially in Africa, where it’s been estimated that people are losing US$1.8 billion annually to remittance fees.

More we know bitcoin, the less we trust it: Poll

Nearly half of all Americans know what bitcoin is but most don't trust the virtual currency, according to a new survey.

Just 13 percent of all respondents to a Harris Interactive poll said they prefer bitcoin over gold. Bitcoin has been embroiled in a series of controversies over the past few months, including inappropriate use and the shuttering of its highest-profile exchange.

Those negative headlines have taken their toll: The survey, conducted on behalf of financial innovation platform Yodlee, found that the more people know about bitcoin the less they trust it. People in the more tech-savvy regions in the West were better acquainted with bitcoin than those in other regions, but only 7 percent said they would invest in it over gold.

The cryptocurrency's biggest fan base: Men in the 18-to-34 age group, 22 percent of whom said they would choose bitcoin over gold.

Bitcoin will never see adoption as a way to pay for coffee and gas.  That is not a bad thing for investors.  The upside for bitcoin is massive, but it won't come from quotidian consumer transactions.  It will come from transactions which need the blockchain, where bitcoin adds substantive value, or where its disruptive power displaces rentiers, and increases efficiency.

Other crypto will fill the gap, and become the donut-buyers crypto.  It will be scalable to global cash transaction levels.  It will work with cheap devices, transparently, and instantly.  XCN is a big step in that direction.

An interesting but I'm not so sure it is fair to compare Bitcoins growth over the last five years to the growth of the smartphone.  The smartphone is being backed/produced by major companies with extremely deep pockets for one.  Bitcoin is grass roots and mainly depends on word to mouth forms of advertisements.  Expecting the same results as far as growth doesn't seem fair.