Topic: Bitcoin: Settlement Layer or Payment Network? - page 2. (Read 2500 times)

you must be drunk or insane.. malleability and RBF mess with transactions so that people should not trust accepting zero confirmed..

Franky and his transactions that confirm in the past instead of the future lol. Is that your contention, that RBF requires the transactions to time-travel in order to confirm?

Franky, make sense man. RBF doesn't alter trust in zero-conf at all. (Neither did malleability, but, pffffffff) You can't just cancel transactions before they confirm, it doesn't work like that.


You seem to specialise in presenting totally bizarre scenarios that don't/won't exist in Bitcoin, but resemble the features of the new tech you're purporting to describe just enough to muddy the waters. Strange how you get subtle details wrong so consistently, with such consistent outcomes. i.e. always attacking Bitcoin. But, hey you're Bitcoin's best mate!

Well the segwit will fix the malleability and the 0 confirm transactions will be harder to double spend isnt that true?

Well the segwit will fix the malleability and the 0 confirm transactions will be harder to double spend isnt that true?

I could argue that Bitcoin can and is a payment network when transactions of lower value are concerned. Transactions are almost instant and I don't see the need to wait for a confirmation or two when paying for a cup of coffee (as an example; other small purchases apply too). However, when it comes to big value then one has to wait. If people use the Lightning Network in the future (where transactions are also almost instant) they will have their 'payment network'.

I agree, however there will be some room to increase the block size limit (to some number that seems both safe and conservative at the time).

I dont think a blockchain based decentralized cryptocurrency can be a payment network. Lightning network, payment channels, you name it.

Ad. 1 You are wrong as bitcoin is hardly currency not being acknowledged by law as a legal tender. You are wrong again, because all that bitcoin is, is because its wide acceptance therefore bitcoin is meant to be spent.

Ad. 2 The transaction once broadcasted is irreversible there is like 99.9% chance that it wont be double spent by the user so the confirmation is not necessarily needed right away, yet I agree that 1 minute transaction would be great.

Ad. 3 most fiat money are sitting somewhere as well, thats irrelevant statement.

Ad. 4 yes bitcoins are the widest accepted it has no intrinsic value thought.

Ad. 5 No. Bitcoin is not like gold at all it was said many times. Bitcoin has no intrinsic value such as gold have. According to the law of many countries bitcoin is not a commodity neither commodity money neither commodity based money. Bitcoin does not even meet the economic theory regarding money. The volatility is said to be in disregard with the function of treasure.

Ad. 6 Bitcoin is well trusted by the bitcoin community, which is like 1 million people at its best. Rather 20 000 who really cares and like 500 that actually do something.

Ad. 7 yes, but only if the development will follow this path. Bitcoin might crash to few dollars literally every now and then and then it will be irrelevant.

Ad. 9 How many "rich" people have you met? Most of them wont invest money to something that does not have a legal boundaries. It has to be first legally defined to be widely accepted.

ad. 10 quickpay currency? Like an altcoin? Do you realize that all of those altcoins in there are just bitcoins with different name that are focused on something that bitcoin could do but the developers havent decided yet to realize it? There is no need for altcoins. How do you know its safe against financial collapse? The fact the bitcoin is not a subject to inflation does not make it 100% best. Inflation makes you to spent your money.

overall: Bitcoin was created as a digital cash. That is it thats how it should be used. Period.

Bitcoin, our beloved cryptocurrency now stands between a forked road and it has to take 1 route, that will define it, and once the route is chosen it cannot turn back. It's now time to decide what bitcoin is, and where it is heading, therefore 2 paths are in front of us: Settlement Layer or Payment Network.

Now obviously my opinion is (and its a strong opinion) that Bitcoin is a Settlement Layer and it's not suited to be a Payment Network.



Here are the reasons why Bitcoin is Settlement Layer:

✓ Bitcoin is a deflationary currency, perfectly suited for longer storage, not instant payments.

✓ Bitcoin has a slow transaction speed, 10 minute is too slow for average transactions, therefore not good for quick shopping.

✓ Most coins are already in cold storage or in black holes, and more will be, it has a low money velocity, therefore few big transactions happen (most transactions are dust faucet payments which can easily be done offchain anyway).

✓ Bitcoin is nr.1. cryptocurrency which means it has instinsic value in the crypto world.

✓ Bitcoin is effectively a commodity, a commodity money, a digital version of gold.

✓ Bitcoin is well trusted and respected therefore any other technology can be easily built upon it.

✓ Bitcoin transaction cost will rise eventually, phasing out small payments, and it will be used only for larger payments, and could become a professional or institutional platform for finance, not an internet joke money.

✓ Bitcoin is nr.1. and the original one, so there can be any derivatives of it linked to it, in a transparent way, that could serve as a quickpayment, like offchain transactions, offchain channels, Lightning Network, payment consolidators,etc..

✓ Making bitcoin a settlement layer is the only way to gain trust of rich people and advancing bitcoin forward to the next level being recognized as a professional platform and a serious thing amongst reputable people.

✓ Bitcoin could be a safe haven against financial collapse, capital control and could store trillions of $ in the future, making it's price stable, while a "quickpay" currency would be very volatile because we know the faster the money velocity the higher the volatility of price. So the trust , the deflationary aspect and the slow money velocity is the perfect combination for a digital commodity and settlement layer system.

✓ Given bitcoin's size, and the money risked in it, we should be extra careful with any sudden changes, so the financially responsible and conservative path is the best way to go, therefore a small block size is recommended.

---

Yes, so this is Bitcoin, and therefore the Core roadmap is the best suited for it. If you want a payment network coin, then try Litecoin or Doge, but Bitcoin is not well suited for it.

---

There was a similar thread recently:P2P Cash or Settlement Layer?. The first question that should be asked is what is achievable (which was also my first input on the other thread). If you really want to put some effort in your thread it might be good to provide some sort of list of features that are inherent to a settlement layer and those that are inherent to a payment network (then mark those that Bitcoin has). What you did was good, but it could be improved. It is just a suggestion though.

Basically, your definition of a settlement layer is something that has a very stable market price?

I cannot see why we cannot do both? You could have the Core protocol serving as the settlement layer and a side chain doing the Payment network. We already have off-chain service providers doing a

good job at handling the payment side. { Or a combinations of them } We should look at this from more sides and have a three dimensional  view on this topic .... Bitcoin are adaptable with Side chains

to handle several functions.  ... SegWit will address some of the capacity issues and the rest will fall in place after that. 

That's like saying the internet should only be used for email, and smart phones should only be used to make phone calls.

The problem here is that you are using an expired frame of thought. A frame of thought that has been made redundant due to the invention of Bitcoin and the Blockchain.

So I think room has to be given to allow bitcoin to continue to mature, instead of looking for small boxes within which to confine it's potential

I cannot see why we cannot do both? You could have the Core protocol serving as the settlement layer and a side chain doing the Payment network.
We already have off-chain service providers doing a good job at handling the payment side.

Because the more complex the protocol is the more risks it carries.

By adding all sorts of junk to it is not a good way when it comes to money.

It must be simple and stable, thats all it needs to be succesful.

If you want complexity then use ethereum or other stuff.

Why does it's use actually have to be defined?

You are limiting yourself to thinking within a very small box. Bitcoin has MANY more use cases than playing the role of a payment network "or" a settlement layer. There are limitless capabilities that this network has, some of which haven't even been defined yet.

So to say that bitcoin "must" be either a payment network, or a settlement layer really does put a cap on bitcoin's potential growth

Value transmission is only one small iota of bitcoins capability, we haven't even scratched the surface of what's truly possible with this technology

Bitcoin, our beloved cryptocurrency now stands between a forked road and it has to take 1 route, that will define it, and once the route is chosen it cannot turn back. It's now time to decide what bitcoin is, and where it is heading, therefore 2 paths are in front of us: Settlement Layer or Payment Network.

Now obviously my opinion is (and its a strong opinion) that Bitcoin is a Settlement Layer and it's not suited to be a Payment Network.