Topic: Bitcoin Maximalism (Read 548 times)

That is good to know. The more wallets like the ones mentioned, the better it'll be for the Lightning Network's adoption in the mainstream world. Basically, Bitcoin has all it takes to become an "All-in-one" solution. It's only limited to developers' imagination. The Lightning Network will be used to process micropayments on the Bitcoin, while the RSK sidechain will be used for Bitcoin-based smart contracts. If only merchants, businesses, and companies made use of these technologies, Bitcoin would've reached a greater audience.

At least, there's diversity on the market. This is a good sign for Blockchain tech's long-term sustainability. The more projects there are, the stronger Bitcoin and Blockchain tech will become. I believe that altcoins will serve as testing grounds for Bitcoin. Developers can test new features on an alternative blockchain before they integrate them into the Bitcoin blockchain (if they wish to do so). Consider how Litecoin became one of the first (if not the first) cryptocurrencies to adopt SegWit. After it became a success on LTC, developers decided to activate it on Bitcoin for miners to signal their approval. It didn't take long before SegWit became fully activated on the BTC blockchain. With how far altcoins have gone, I don't think Bitcoin will become the sole cryptocurrency in the decentralized realm. Just my thoughts

The problem is that you can't expect everyone to take advantage of the potential financial independency. Simply put, people are lazy and seek the easy way of doing things. Most of them might never use a non-custodial wallet.


That depends on what you think that the average customer is more likely to value. For example, Bitcoin transactions are irreversible. Assuming that most merchants will use third-party payment processors, this probably won't be a problem if they have some refund policy like Visa or MasterCard. Otherwise, there are going to be a ton of complaints. Unless governments push CBDCs and negative interest rates, I don't think that ordinary people have any significant incentive to switch over.


That's a good remark. I see Strike as a necessary product for the transitional period where more and more merchants start accepting Bitcoin while users are slowly catching up.

i did exactly what you did because if the holder might be ok to be maximalist but for the traders i think it is too ineffective and can reduce the income than it should get.
because the option to buy not only bitcoin but accompanied by altcoins is highly recommended for traders, and actually this method can also be used for holders as well

Facts and logical reasoning have never been a priority for that user, whichever pseudonym they happen to be operating under at any given moment.  I wouldn't expect things to change on that front any time soon, heh.  They're simply here to shill Proof-of-Stake.  One-track mind.  Little else matters to them, least of all integrity.

---

As it seems a fitting question for a topic about maximalism:  At what point are we simply re-inventing the wheel?  If the general idea behind Bitcoin was to empower people to handle their own money, going down that route, it sounds more as though we've effectively just added another middleman to the existing group of financial middlemen.  Unless I've misunderstood something, I get the impression there's no real benefit to the average customer beyond what they'd get using fiat alone?  Or do the benefits stack more on the side of the merchants who wish to receive payment in BTC?

Bitcoin has a first mover advantage and 12 years of adoption history behind it... that's a tremendous leg up and can't be overcome. At least not anytime soon.

I think there are a lot of things and issues that bitcoin and its developers can expand upon and fix, but a lot of the changes that will have a significant impact on the bitcoin and the transactions overall are major and are not really welcomed within the bitcoin community in itself because they want to stay as authentic to the original coin as much as possible even though it is not that optimized for as many people as it was excepted, like one of the issues is the high transaction fees and long confirmation time that gets worse and worse each time the bitcoin gains a bit of a popularity, and many of the coin that want to expand and solve issue that bitcoin has don't gain as much popularity as bitcoin does because they are always looked upon as a scuffed copy of it.

In terms of technology, Bitcoin will only have upgrades but they always fade because the source code is difficult to upgrade aggressively. Altcoins are built entirely new code but the problem is there are too many altcoins and they are not really decentralized like Bitcoin.
People are used to Bitcoin as a long-term and reliable investment. It is separate from blockchain, even those who are not knowledgeable about crypto and blockchain are still actively investing in Bitcoin.

I love Bitcoin the most but I use altcoins too.In fact when I want to exchange Bitcoins fast and with lower fees I send them to an exchange,exchange with a coin with lower fees and then withdraw to my bank account or credit card.What I want to say is,we should not be fanatics of only one technology,we should mix them all if possible and in the end the result should be good for our own profitability.

I was viewed as someone who is closed-minded for saying that Bitcoin’s POW part has been ossified, and will never EVER be upgraded to change into another algorithm or another mechanism, but the moment I want to be open-minded and ask for everyone’s opinions on Drivechains I’m called someone who wants to start “drama”.

OP, research BIP-300/Drivechains. But I warn you, asking too much questions, and you will be branded negatively, https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/on-paul-sztorcs-bip-300-proposal-5344091

Now I know how it it is to be franky1. Sorry, franky1. I will try to be open-minded next time. Haha.

You should check out Taproot, Tapscript and Schnorr and update that "Nope".  Not to mention side chains, lightning etc.

As far as "Energy Efficient", anything can be efficient if you don't care about security.  Using energy is what keeps the network secure.  The alt-coins that promise otherwise are preying upon the naïveté of people who aren't following the security of them.

As far as "not affordable"?  Really?  You can buy any amount of bitcoin that you want so it is as affordable as you want it to be.

Login, facts, and reason seem to be missing from at least 3 of the points above.

I find this to be the most likely. Great response.

You mean bitcoin "principles" never changed otherwise bitcoin (consensus) rules have changed multiple times. For example in early days we introduced P2SH scripts (a big change in rules), in 2017  SegWit and a couple of days ago Taproot.
That is also not the reason for bitcoin's security (not just a sense of it). Bitcoin is secure because its protocol is secure and without flaws, it is fully decentralized so it can not be controlled or maliciously altered, any attack vector in bitcoin is either impossible due to its choice of protocol (eg. ECDSA) or costs a lot that becomes practically impossible (eg. 51% attack).

Ethereum is also centralization, inflationary, has severely flawed protocol with a lot of attack vectors, has no real world utility, has a massive premine, is super expensive to use due to its serious scaling flaws and its blockchain lacks immutability.

I don't think that the majority of users will ever need to know how complex the Lightning Network is under the hood. BlueWallet provides a good experience for users who don't want to bother with managing their own channels. Strike has taken an even bolder approach and might actually be able to get ordinary people onboard. The user needs only to scan a Bitcoin or Lightning invoice and it will be automatically paid by Strike. The user doesn't even need to own any bitcoin; their credit card is charged instead.

Bitcoin has the network with the most power, never hacked, and Bitcoin rules never changed, that's why it gives a sense of security.

As opposite:
Ethereum is a better coin, but it suffered a 51% attack once, and now it is controlled by whatever Vitalik Buterin wants to achieve (EIP 1559, Vitalik vs. Miners example). That is why Ethereum price is 15 times below BTC even when its technology is superior.

Good point. It's yet the time where SegWit and the Lightning Network lack mainstream adoption. This could be related to altcoins' prominence on the crypto/Blockchain space. Why would people use something as complicated as the Lightning Network, when they can easily switch to another altcoin with on-chain scaling? The same thing can be said about smart contracts on the Bitcoin blockchain. Despite the dream of using Bitcoin for everything, altcoins are still relevant in the mainstream world. As long as the competition is healthy, Bitcoin's dominance will be somewhat-limited. More projects = more innovation in the crypto/Blockchain space. Sidechains and Layer-2 scaling expands Bitcoin's functionalities, but they'll never replace altcoins in their entirety. I'm fine with that as long as Bitcoin stays decentralized. Just my thoughts

There is blockchain trilemma b/w scalability, centralization and security. While BTC is highly secure and decentralized its disappointingly slow. There are many altcoins that solve this trilemma in terms of speed, so in the long run we will require altcoins when it comes to speedy blockchain.

That depends on how much you consider sidechains or layer 2 as bitcoin. Binance don't even use segwit yet. What makes you think that all these other platforms and businesses will adopt these? RSK? Is there even one exchange that uses it? Maybe bitfinex, cannot remember it now.

Well, developers are trying to make Bitcoin an "All-in-one" blockchain platform with sidechains and the Lightning Network. Bitcoin is capable of doing many things altcoins do right now. For instance, you can deploy and execute smart contracts with the security of the Bitcoin blockchain using RSK. People don't need to use a separate cryptocurrency like Ethereum to get access to this. All they need is their own BTC (in the form of RBTC) to interact with smart contracts on the RSK sidechain. The same way, people don't need to use altcoins which provide blazing-fast transactions and ultra-low fees since it's all possible with Bitcoin's Lightning Network. The more sidechains and off-layer solutions, the more Bitcoin's functionalities are expanded, putting altcoins in the dust.

One thing for sure is that there are many altcoins with no real use cases in the mainstream world. Bitcoin is what it's all about, as it's the one that moves the whole crypto market. Every single cryptocurrency depends on Bitcoin to succeed. After all, Bitcoin is the reserve cryptocurrency of the market. When people join crypto/Blockchain tech, the first cryptocurrency they come into is Bitcoin. Not Ethereum, Dogecoin, or any of the other altcoins on the market. Some altcoins have survived because they have vibrant communities supporting them every step of the way. Whenever they'll stand the test of time or fade into oblivion, it's yet to be determined. At least, Bitcoin will last forever thanks to its decentralized and censorship-resistant design. Just my thoughts

Correct. And so I can't stand when all these so called laser eyes people who tell the world Bitcoin is they way and only Bitcoin, then go and also get paid to promote companies like Blockfi. Into the Block is a nice show but he also promotes and brings in so many influencers and big names that are also promoting a lot of well as you say, scams.

thats just scamming
any service promising automated profits by simply depositing funds into them is a scam