Topic: Bitcoin has no future as a payments network, says FTX chief - page 2. (Read 938 times)

Yeah I was confused why he was saying this. Seems like a very bizarre statement from an industry executive who should know better. Yeah the base chain won't be useful for payments, at least not everyday payments, buying a car or a house or something and paying a $5 or $10 or even $50 fee is fine, but even the current $1 to $2 transaction fees are too much for nomrla daily one-digit or two-digit dollar purchases. But LN solves this.

You aren't going to get a better money solution in crypto than Bitcoin. And LN makes Bitcoin very cheap to spend. So it seems completely nonsensical to imply that some other crypto network will be better than Bitcoin for payments, considering that no other blockchain even comes remotely close to Bitcoin in all the ways that are important.

I believe the reason why people are not using it because only few sites or platforms are offering the LN payment method. Even exchanges are not offering LN services. If people will see the LN availability, I am sure they will utilize it because of the very cheap fees. But if they won't see platforms offering LN payment, I don't think they will patronize it.

LN is not a bad method to use but at the end if people are not moving there then I do not know what good it does. I get that it is definitely a great method and it is cheap and it is fast, I used it before as well so not like I never tried it and it was the best thing ever.

I literally paid a few satoshi as fee and then it went to the address just a few seconds later, so it is the ideal thing and there is nothing wrong with using it if we are talking about only the fee and the pace. However, it must be a bit limited if everyone is declining to use it, consider why would people not use that if it is such a great thing, it should be used by everyone if it was okay.

Again, this is just an opinion. It seems to me that if you believe all the opinions, the result will not be very positive.

It seems like you've jumped to a conclusion without properly understanding what he is saying. Why do you think that Bitcoin acting as a commodity somehow makes it impossible for it to keep the biggest market cap of all cryptocurrency? There is plenty of room for another currency to come along as surpass Bitcoin and he puts out some very good points as to why an improved cryptocurrency could do better. It seems like you're connecting dots in your own mind that were never implied. It's very valid to point out that the Bitcoin network does not scale at at an appropriate level to be able to handle the amount of transactions that existing network provides on an energy efficiency basis.

People who respond to questions like this do not represent the whole bitcoin owners and that is only assuming they didn't lie.

Wrong. PoW doesn't do that at all. The whole design and usage of a blockchain does.

People like Franky should propose their "better" solution instead of blindly attacking what others have proposed which is working.

Wrong. BSV and any other copycat is considered an altcoin because they are not bitcoin. Simple as that. They are considered shitcoin because they have nothing to offer and they just copied bitcoin, added some flaws to the protocol and are running with far less hashrate.

Bitcoin is already functioning as a currency. It is not perfect but the humanity has never been capable of building a perfect system ever. Expecting otherwise is naive. Bitcoin has reached a nice balance between decentralization (and all its benefits) while functioning as a currency.

up until now, bitcoin is not heavily used as payment method because most holders are treating this as an investment, where they can earn profits if they will just hold and not use it. aside from the expensive fees if you are using 3rd party wallets, the confirmation also takes time and that is not favourable to payment sector. he may have reasons why he said such statement. but he may change his mind once bitcoin and other crypto are well-accepted as payment method and people are using it.

Personally i think this is not a crucial thing cause bitcoin isn't the same cryptocurrencie and we have alot of other coins that can be used for payment so i don't think he is really attacking bitcoin but maybe he mean that we have better alternatives for that matter

Assuming that bitcoin is the only medium of exchange used by everyone in this world so millions of transactions will clog the network which is what he actually said if I am not wrong but why we only need bitcoin, this can be one of the way that people can use while combine with existing or upcoming medium of exchange. As of now bitcoin is cheaper to transact and the implementation of LN can solve most of the clog we all are talking.

PoW is not a scalability problem.. asics do not ever see transactions.. it doesnt matter if a block has 1 transaction or a million transactions an asic is still going to see the same length hash.. so scalability is not a PoW thing at all.. they are two separate things entirely that do not impact each other

there are thousands of people that dont use LN for many many reasons. they are just too shy to point out the flaws due to the absolute abuse they would get from the LN fans. i simply do not fear or care about the LN fans, so i dont fear speaking out about their flaws and fantasy dreams of utopia.

its not just about not running on a blockchain. its EVERYTHING about LN thats bad.
its the data packets that go between channels are not actually raw transactions that bitcoin would understand.
its that the channels are not audited.
its that the denomination LN uses is not sats or btc.
its the factor of requiring to lock(stake) up coins to then play with pegged different denominations on another network
its the liquidity issues bottlenecks
its the middlemen routing problem
its the lack of sovereign control due to co-signing and middlemen
its everything.

LN has not fixed anything because LN has MORE flaws than bitcoin.
the liquidity problem stops payments from being sent around for any useful amount.. yes great in utopian dream of wanting to spend 2cents. but useless if your locking up say $1.2k for a couple months and wanting to buy pizza every day for 2 months, i guarantee you, you will not successfully fulfil every pizza payment in 2 months. for many reasons


oh and LN is not more private. they literally have to publicly announce their channels just for routing to function in their current iteration of their bolts(facepalm).. just wait until regulates see which ones 'route' and then make them have to become registered MSB, simply for making payments on behalf of others for a commission(yep LN is ripe for regulators to get lots of licence fee's)

as for 'currency'
bitcoin IS recognised legally as internationally wide currency by many governments(but not common man in their daily lives) which is where governments managed to slide in their jurisdiction to then treat businesses swapping fiat for btc as currency exchanges rather than retail merchants buying selling product.

but you might mean treated as common currency by common man in their daily life where people have actual daily utility. there are many many ways to achieve this. (unlike the LN fangirls that pretend they are the only 'solution'(facepalm). and FALSELY pretend i am trying to push and enforce only one solution in the opposite direction to LN. sorry but there are many ways to help bitcoin grow. and i mean bitcoin. not other networks brand stealing, and no its not just a blocksize debate like the silly fangirls ignorantly think)

When I first the topic of this thread, i have a little smile inside me because there will always be an attack on Bitcoin by people who are after creating FUD in the market.

When I learn that the man was named the biggest bitcoin antagonist in the crypto space I was surprised because his FTX supported BTC. What he said about Bitcoin didn't surprise me but I hope a lot of people that are into crypto investment understand the purpose of this people because most of them did join the BTC boat when it was $6K because they underestimated it and now that the price is in $29K they want to do something that could make the price go dip more so they could accumulate it before the major bullish market start.
They are playing a political scam game guys.

Remove Bitcoin as number 1?
For your information, Bitcoin has been the number 1 through it concept ever since people understand being beneficial and this is not Sam Bankman-Fried doing but the community support doing. In addition, it's the same concept that makes people see BTC as the best payment system for cross border payment.

I understand why he made those comments. Bitcoin, in its current state, doesn't scale effectively to be used as a global payments network. Also, even though a lot of the comments in here direct their statements toward a bitcoin that is used for payments, only a handful are really using their bitcoins to pay for things they purchase. Most will surely just keep their bitcoin for the long run, in hopes of netting a lot more from what they initially invested. Being realistic isn't being antagonistic, it is actually the opposite of that—it helps things improve and the gears turning for future development.

Those statements in Op is very correct. Though Op wanted to throw him out of context but I surely understand the man.
Though Satoshi proposed bitcoin as a currency, and as long as we are maintaining the legacy and living upto the expectations of bitcoin, we must first call bitcoin a currency before an investment assets.
To buttress what the man said, if you conduct a questionnaire in this forum, you will understand that almost 90% of people using btc in this forum are holders instead of spenders, and so it is outside the forum.

The PoW system posses some kind of scalability issues on bitcoin and we all know it. The LN has come to augment this flaw if bitcoin. Yet, some persons like Franky1 believes that LN is not bitcoin and not exclusively for bitcoin because it doesn't run on blockchain. With the privacy concern about Bitcoin, anything that isn't bitcoin would always be treated with care and that is why BSV of btc hard fork is not seen as bitcoin.
What I am sure of is that bitcoin will unanimously undergo some kind of reforms if it's to serve as a complete currency.

Call me skeptical, but when I see that instead of arrests and prison sentences, there is mention of punishment for possible tax evasion when it comes to Kwon - I wonder if this is happening in South Korea or some highly corrupt third world country. The person behind it all says publicly that he enjoys watching companies die, and there is a saying that whoever rejoices in another's misfortune will have an even greater misfortune - I hope he will receive appropriate punishment.

Not small mate but the number of people that owns bitcoin are too much. Just see how many countries legalized the use of it and also if there's only small amount of people who own bitcoins, why would the value of bitcoin grow like this? There will always be mass adoption that will takes place because many people or countries are already starting to recognize bitcoin and its benefits.

There are still btc owners out there that uses their bitcoins on different purposes and this includes paying or sending money. Maybe the guy that said btc has no future for payment network, doesn't use his btc on this purpose because he is afraid to pay a little higher fee and he is afraid that his transaction will get delayed.

               We shouldn't hate on the guy though for expressing his views. Just like any other person out there, he is just stating what he currently sees in Bitcoin. Besides, the guy has a bit of a point too. But even if these issues that he mentioned get fixed, I still think that bitcoin would most likely be still widely utilized more as a store of value rather than a means of payment. Simply because people are greedy and its potential to increase in price over the years is the real culprit behind the issue of more people holding it rather than spending it.

You are right with that. We have alternatives, coins. Lightning network is one of it like you said. They can also use natural sources of energy as they are more cheaper although the cost of miners (equipment) will still be the same which is expensive but they don't really need to buy one or to become a miner when the only thing that they want is to accept bitcoin as payment method to their business. Just let the miners handle the fees and hassle but bitcoin users can worry less.

You know when famous personalities starts attacking bitcoin, it could mean that they want the price of bitcoin to go down more evenly so that they can buy it cheaply by themselves or they do this things because they are supporting a different crypto and they want it to become a number one coin.

The logic behind it is that, you do not spend gold to buy something, but you do that with bitcoin currently but it is getting lesser and lesser. So, he is saying that considering the energy used to create it, and send it, and transaction fee costs (and the mining power required to make it secure) and also the fee cost itself for the sender, etc etc all comes down to the fact that you can't buy a cup of coffee with bitcoin since the fee would be higher than the coffee itself.

But as an asset, just like gold, you could just buy it and hold it and make money. So bitcoins future may look a lot like gold currently, instead of being a currency, it could be an asset.

knew the bodyguard of the LN clan would turn up. aww, should i call you LN daddy?

its always the same half a dozen people that LOVE LN that say the same BS scripts.. you say nothing original.
your(and your pals) solution to everything 'fork off and start a new network'

you love other networks, you can only imagine other networks as solutions..
..very revealing
you want people that want more from bitcoin to move to other networks (facepalm)

you dont want the bitcoin network to change. because that means competition that pulls people away from other networks. you dont want bitcoin network to grow.

how about. because you know you love other networks. you go play with other networks and stop trying to get involved in bitcoin topics where people that want BITCOIN scaling and keeping bitcoin as the main useful network. where actual bitcoiners can actually talk about bitcoin without it being a subtle advert for your other networks.
.. basically. try and learn what is bitcoin. and understand you dont want to use bitcoin. because you are happy on another network. and then, YOU go play on your other network with your buddies.

there are thousands of topics talking about SCALING BITCOIN. hundred of thousands of topics about uses of bitcoin.... and only dozens of topics about LN.. so many thousands of people do want bitcoin(the actual bitcoin network) to scale and to be the main useful network.
so grow up and stop playing victim because i call out your crappy altnet.

..
heres a mega lesson in niche utility..
if YOU want a bitcoin L2.. how about YOU fork LN. and make a separate LN that only functions with bitcoin. which has its units of measure only in btc and sats. where there is a proper BOLTS rule all wallets have to follow to ensure all channels can be audited to protect value.
no htlc 'payment' messages, no 'turbo', no 'msat', no 'atomic swap' no need to even lock/peg value.

now you go FORK OFF

So instead of whining about Lightning, go and propose a better solution. Raising the block size has fallen on face. It's been perpetually proven that the users don't want to change that rule. Consensus has shown it. If you don't like it, fork off. That's the beauty of decentralized systems. Stop enforcing your obnoxious conspiracies to others, it doesn't work. You're just becoming even more abhorrent.

Back to ignore.