Topic: Bitcoin has no future as a payments network, says FTX chief - page 3. (Read 938 times)

anyways.
due to dev politics (not any hardware/physical incapability) bitcoin has been prevented from evolving the bitcoin network to be useful for 'the unbanked'
if you want to have bitcoin continue to be useful. things need to be done to move bitcoin forward. passed the 7 year long 'stall' era we are in.. yep this stall era is designed to promote other networks. and needs to be dealt with

yes bitcoin can remain the main asset. because the mining cost dictates the underlying bottomline store of VALUE (yes i said value, separate from price.. because PRICE(volatile speculation of temparary measure) sits above the underlying store of value amount)
EG. when ethereum detonates to PoS. its SoV will drop by 1000x because the cost of mining(staking) will be only a couple dollars rather than a couple thousand dollars

so as long as bitcoin remains the main network people put the effort and cost into mining on. then bitcoin remains the most costly coin to acquire

as for being the dominant 'market cap' asset.
market cap is a meaningless measure.
its a silly kindergarden math stat.  it has no significance.

i can easily create a crap coin of 5trilllion pre-mined coins. sell just a single coin for $5 and instantly create a market cap of $25trillion
(remember when the 10,000 bitcoin pizza ($40 of pizza)) in 2010
that made each coin deemed valued at $0.004
meaning the 5mill coins in circulation had a market cap of $20k
all from that one pizza deal

Yeah, keep interpreting everything in your own special manner in order to find "mistakes" everywhere and keep on with your odd narrative, you're doing great job polluting everything.

gotta laugh. contradicts himself in the same post.
??L2 of bitcoin??.. (facepalm)
 
its not a bitcoin LAYER.. its a separate network.
you are still referring it as a second layer aka level of bitcoin..

its not like bitcoin is segments of an orange fruit and LN is the orange zesty skin that forms around bitcoin segmants (layer)
its not like LN is also some new tech 'quantum super position where it also is a citrus layer lemon fruit (LTC) at the same time..

LN is not about being layers/skins. version 2 of coins.
.. yes it pretends to be.. and you have fallen for that game. . but soon enough you will realise the game being played... but for now, seems your still stuck thinking of it as the skin of bitcoin.


LN is a hybrid tree which branches out to have different fruit. hooked to it
it is not the fruit itself
LN is a bridge between different cities. it is not the city or city street itself
LN is a boat between different continents. it is not the continent/country itself

LN is not a continents shoreline, thats physically part of that continent to give only that continents citizens somewhere nice to sunbathe
LN is not a ringroad owned/maintained by the city and only that city citizens can use
LN is not a skin of a fruit thats protects and useful only for that particular fruit

..
take the CBCD.
china have one. Switzerland have one, france have one, russia have one. but they can all connect to what is called an m-bridge.
the M-bridge is not a CBDC. its a type of 'new age world bank of SDR'
where by the SDR is not common "fiat"(fiat being old equivalent to CDBC)

LN wants to become the 'world bank' of crypto. 'world bank' is not 'dollar'
what they want to do is:
by locking crypto up where its main co-signer are elite services(megahubs). and then allow their customers to play with other denomination that are not as audited secure/valued as proper crypto.
(yep LN msats are not like digital gold LN msats are not btc)

so instead of concentrating on what other networks can do..
so instead of concentrating on trying to affix the bitcoin brand to other networks

.. maybe try to realise what is not bitcoin so that you can their reign in your support. and then put your support into what actually is bitcoin and what can actually be useful for BITCOIN

You've picked the wrong guy. I don't think that LN is Bitcoin 2.0; LN is LN.


I don't care at all how it's called. And I don't care what was initially designed for.
It was improved, it seems to do well enough the L2 job for Bitcoin and it helps. Imho this is what matters at the end of the day.
You don't like it, don't use it.

Every single one of them is the same, they use Bitcoin as a launch base and then they start throwing shit as it since they need to sell the world their more spectacular project, another altcoin that will turn to dust. And the ones that are calling themselves true believers and so are just about the money, I remember on a similar discussion you brought up Michael Saylor's old tweets, the miraculous change in his opinion wasn't because of the technology or the fundamentals, those were the same, it was simply because he smelled the money!

That's why I totally dislike having some random guy worshipped like he's some kind of leader of the bitcoin world, sooner or later it will turn bad, really really bad!

One good news about the other scam you mentioned, seems like South Korea's authorities are on the move. The original article mentions also something about investigating the way customers were attracted with a high annual interest rate that might get jail time, and in Korea, you can get 40 years for just lying to investors about where you put their money.

bitcoin has been in the last 7 years stifled in its evolution of onchain growth.
stifled on purpose. hoping people LIKE YOU flip over to other networks.

LN is not a bitcoin thing. its a network of its own. in 2015-17 LN existed but not in a form bitcoin could recognise.

MANY coins adapted to meet LN compatibility (shame really it should have been other networks like LN that should have done the editing to meet bitcoin format.. not the other way round)

this is why LN is not bitcoin:
EMPHASIS
1. LN was not designed to fit bitcoin (but for advertising purposes it wanted to steal the name/brand fame/trust of bitcoin fans)
2. LN is not a sole feature that only works/compatible with bitcoin
3. its a bridge between many coins. its not meant to be a 'bitcoin'

so stop trying to think of LN as bitcoin 2.0.. because its not, heck its not even bitcoin 0.00.01

..
with that said. if you want BITCOIN(emphasis*1000) to evolve. that means actually getting the devs to drop their politics and get them to actually evolve the bitcoin ONCHAIN scaling
we are not in dial-up days of PC's that only have 100gb hard drives.
those days passed a decade ago, its time we moved forward

Does anyone with a little common sense believe that any of these famous people in the cryptocurrency world really believe in Bitcoin? They use it as a base to build various companies through which they will sooner or later try to sell some of their ideas on how there is something better than Bitcoin.

Just look at the list of those who have been shilling that scam from South Korea for months, and have done damage of some say as much as $80 billion - all of them have in common that they believe in only one thing, and that is profit. It means nothing to them that will deceive millions of people, that some may commit suicide and that will kill people's hopes for a better tomorrow.

For those who know who is Mike Novogratz, it will be hard to believe that he did such nonsense - will Sam SOLman tattoo his favorite alt too?

Craig Scammer Wright is also a college graduate and has a PhD but that doesn't make him smart nor his statements right. Same with creating a website and a service that makes you more money!

In my experience they always want to push a "better" solution that ends up filling their pockets.

In other words a picture with an old dude who used to be somebody cost him a lot of money

and like the other said that bitcoin can still be using as payment using lightning network or using layer 2 if possible

In my opinion bitcoin wont ever go  is the mother of crypto

I would agree on most occassions, however, not in this interview because what Sam Bankman-Fried is implying agrees with mainstream media's agenda against cryptocoins like bitcoin. Those clarification statements Sam tweeted were made after the backlash from the community. However, I agree with what he said about bitcoin, but I am skeptical of his agenda in why and in the way he said them.

There was an interview with Sam Bankman-Fried before where he said that the next Bitcoin will be Solana. This man is one of the most intelligent people in the cryptospace. He knows the difference between bitcoin and proof of stake altcoins but he declares Solana will become the next Bitcoin because it can make thousands of transactions per second? What is the agenda hehehehe.



The next Bitcoin has to be a blockchain with the potential to process thousands of transactions per second. Since the Solana blockchain can process 50,000 transactions per second, Sam Bankman-Fried sees potential in SOL becoming the next Bitcoin.

Influential investors are bullish on Solana, contributing to a rise in the altcoin’s adoption. In a recent interview with Kitco, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) lauded Solana for the protocol’s ability to scale to millions of transactions per second. The FTX CEO said that it makes Solana an integral part of cryptocurrency adoption and the next Bitcoin.

Source https://www.fxstreet.com/cryptocurrencies/news/ftx-founder-sam-bankman-fried-believes-that-solana-can-be-the-next-bitcoin-202111270618

Lightning is advancing so fast that it's hard to keep up with the latest.

Right now you can setup a card to make tap payments using only Bitcoin, no legacy financial institutions required.

Here's a post I made about this: https://stacker.news/items/29647

So basically there's already a payment network based on Bitcoin that can be used with the same convenience as credit cards today.

There's no future for these institutions that want to keep charging huge fees for moving money around.

I think the journalist took his comment out of context and they used that to spread FUD.    How nice will it be for these journalists with a hidden agenda to steer a conversation in a direction, where you are forced to say something that might be used against you.  

When you want to take down an organization or a movement, you start from the top and you take down their leaders. This might have been planned or it is just some people with a hidden agenda that are nitpicking certain statements to push their agenda.  

Example : Journalist : Do you think Bitcoin use a lot of electricity..
              Guest : Yes...... bla bla bla
              Journalist : Does the high electrical use of Bitcoin mining, influence it's future ......

The guest must navigate a minefield to say or respond to the question that has limited exits ....because it was a loaded question. 

Maybe he is just trying to implicate that the functionality of BTC compared to the newest cryptocurrencies that are out there is outdated. It doesn't mean that it's going to be obsolete or something, but it would be different and lose in terms of function. If you look at it now, somewhere in any country, someone will use BTC to receive or send payments; you would need minutes to wait for it to be confirmed. In the real world, that's not ideal.

So I see other cryptocurrencies stepping up to the payments network. I hope that Lightning would be widespread already, but until that is user-friendly and could be quickly done, I think it's other cryptocurrencies first.

Don't get me wrong in my comment; I love BTC, but it's being realistic, and compared with the other crypto, BTC lacks in it. So that's why he said it's just going to be a store in value asset.

Whatever mistake he might have said in describing proof of work, he still is one of the smartest founders in the cryptospace. He graduated in MIT, he created his own exchange from nothing and he is presently one of the biggest names.

This is why despite being one of the smartest, what is his agenda behind his statements? He is one of the biggest donors in the Democratic National Convention and look at the picture, he is with Bill Clinton hehehe. Also, after the backlash from the interview, his PR team did very well in creating his statements for him to clear his stance. He should pay them more Solana and FTT hehehehe.

I wouldn't say you can't.
If we look at history, only a handful of developers tried to come up with more efficient solutions so we can say that nobody is really trying to come up with better coins so we can't conclusively say "we can't".
For example they tried PoS and other alternative algorithms and they failed. Another thing I liked was DAG but that didn't look promising at all. The rest, from litecoin, namecoin, etc. all the way to ETH are shitcoins that have been copying bitcoin in all aspects while changing small things in the protocol.

I mean looking at the current bitcoin's history for sure he's not wrong, people prefer to hodl because the hope (know?) it'll go up in value again in the future, but also let's not forget that a very small amount of people own bitcoin. If and when there would be a mass adoption, and that's a big if, things will probably change.

What we need to question is the flow of journalist writing itself. Because what he wrote could be an agenda for his interests. A journalist can twist the facts in an instant. Turning the facts is their paid duty for a particular interest. I wouldn't really believe a statement written by a journalist. Because we can still look for credible sources by listening to live video conversations and watching them in full. For me, the original source is still catchable, so referring journalists is the second option. The first one we can still reach by looking for full videos, not full articles.

For sure, Sam Bankman-Fried knows about Lightning Network (LN) too. He is just for sure telling his belief or opinion about Bitcoin this time.
In the beginning, I didn't expect that Sam Bankman-Fried will release a statement about this because some people, will accept it as FUD or bad news for Bitcoin, but for me, I don't find anything FUD for this kind of statement from a billionaire in the cryptocurrency industry.

the language of journalists sometimes corners the object that is being discussed, so in this case we must read the original information, not the piecemeal news.
but here I don't have a conclusion in the future on whether or not bitcoin can be used as a means of payment where as we know fiat is the main thing in terms of payment, but if as an investment tool bitcoin cs can be said to be the best investment if we buy it at the right time

I personally disagree with him.  I think anyone who’s states right now that bitcoin will never have a future as a payment system is ignoring the fact that bitcoin can always be improved/updated (despite those who are against this sentiment). There still is some hope with lightning network, so I don’t think we can write it off just yet.