BTC dominance is far too high and I hardly doubt that an altcoin will replace BTC one day. I prefer to use altcoins, but the majority of investors still believes in Bitcoin and sells all their altcoins to get some extra BTC.
I understand you prefer altcoin but what coins you are using and what coin you trust more than bitcoin who is the legit coin in the market and the reason i am asking is because there are only a few coins in the market that can be trusted and the rest of the markets are filled with copy coins rather than any innovation. 
Topic: Bitcoin Will Not Be a Medium of Exchange - page 3. (Read 609 times)
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
Lightning network just solves one problem though (or two, if we count fees + speed of transaction). It doesn't help much with volatility however. Who wants to buy a TV for 1K today, when a month from now that same amount of BTC could be worth 2-5K? Nobody will use BTC as a medium of exchange... they would hold it for speculation.
An exception could be in 3rd world countries where their own fiat fluctuates more than BTC does. I suppose it could catch on as a medium of exchange there with the LN. But other cryptos are probably better suited to that task than BTC is, at least currently.
In my opinion, it takes a long time for Bitcoin to become a medium of exchange because of many factors that are obstacles. Until now, not everyone understands what bitcoin is and how it functions or they know about cryptocurrency. Maybe Bitcoin will become more practical if used as a digital asset, as an alternative investment or safe haven other than gold
right now its can be used to buy stuff online. its a medium of exchange. right now one way to buy altcoins like ETH is to have BTC first. cryptocurrencies are medium of exchange it functions like fiat. its even in the forex market now just like a real fiat. you may not spend it but some people do. we keep trading it like currencies buying USDT with BTC. there is no good and bad money here what we have are bloodmoney.
Bitcoin is one pioneer of cryptocurrency that can know and know many people. The games in the online offer make it more fun and we have. Bitcoin prices dropped it was reasonable. Because every year must have slots and there will be down posted there.
It almost every december or end of the year bitcoin price will be bleeding because of many people cash out their bitcoin to spend for holiday or something like that. It's usual thing happened in crypto. And the price will recover at Q1 of next year. So, for new investors investing on december is always the best decission to make
While I like the concept of LN and its current technological implementation is decent, the majority of merchants accepting Bitcoin payments still do not accept LN payments from my experience (though there are a number that I use), and most transactions still take place on the mainnet for both purchases and regular transactions between wallets. Also seems like adoption of LN's mostly stagnated or is starting shrink by a bit too, from this chart that I've taken from txstats.com (click for link) that looks at both the sum of the value of all open channels and the sum of their values. The good news is that we're still way above where these values were a year ago, but it seems like things have slowed down somewhat.
Yeah, it can't be for now because of its volatility but I think it will never cause we still prioritize the fiat money as number one. Bitcoin has a separate use-case and different space so it is only exchangeable in an online market. Past HODLers already changed, they realize that it is not only its use case, but it should also be circulating and spendable.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
Lightning network just solves one problem though (or two, if we count fees + speed of transaction). It doesn't help much with volatility however. Who wants to buy a TV for 1K today, when a month from now that same amount of BTC could be worth 2-5K? Nobody will use BTC as a medium of exchange... they would hold it for speculation.
An exception could be in 3rd world countries where their own fiat fluctuates more than BTC does. I suppose it could catch on as a medium of exchange there with the LN. But other cryptos are probably better suited to that task than BTC is, at least currently.
In my opinion, it takes a long time for Bitcoin to become a medium of exchange because of many factors that are obstacles. Until now, not everyone understands what bitcoin is and how it functions or they know about cryptocurrency. Maybe Bitcoin will become more practical if used as a digital asset, as an alternative investment or safe haven other than gold
Bitcoin is one pioneer of cryptocurrency that can know and know many people. The games in the online offer make it more fun and we have. Bitcoin prices dropped it was reasonable. Because every year must have slots and there will be down posted there.
Bitcoin world domination does not reduce price volatility
Bitcoin needs to reach critical mass for world domination. This is a future outcome that Bitcoin supporters often pitch. In this future, Bitcoin price will become less volatile. It will be suitable as a medium of exchange. This argument derives from micro view of Bitcoin economics. If Bitcoin market cap is hundreds of trillions of dollars, a few hundred billions exchange will not affect price. The flaw of the argument is it assumes Bitcoin is micro and local. Bitcoin is permissionless and global. It is accessible by everyone.
Dominance is not an asset that protects the price volatility. They are the governments that maintain the volatility of today's paper money. Actually, the lack of access to the BTC may cause trouble, but with some regulations it will be possible to counter it. I recently read about the arrest of several people who wanted to move the price of the AUD. And they were the governments that opposed it. So there is nothing special about the other moneys, they seem more appropriate because there are governments protecting them.Bitcoin needs to reach critical mass for world domination. This is a future outcome that Bitcoin supporters often pitch. In this future, Bitcoin price will become less volatile. It will be suitable as a medium of exchange. This argument derives from micro view of Bitcoin economics. If Bitcoin market cap is hundreds of trillions of dollars, a few hundred billions exchange will not affect price. The flaw of the argument is it assumes Bitcoin is micro and local. Bitcoin is permissionless and global. It is accessible by everyone.
Bitcoin supply is fixed. But its demand is unpredictable.
Another reason for the acceptance of BTC is that it is limited. Unlimited paper money causes inflation and uncertain movements of governments. Therefore, a limited and traceable system causes to more positive results. Imagine you can see how much money governments have, how much money they send to whom. Would not that be better for all of us?Besides, we do not have to use BTC as a 1BTC. It may be limited to 21 million, but lets calculate it as 0.0000000001.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
eventually this LN will be used in more wallets that we may not even need to create channel anymore but simply send to any address since by default all are using LN. BTC is meant to be spent, to buy products on stores that is why we do have QR codes for it. right now we can send fees already, its not just going to be SOV, it all depend to how you will use it.
You should examine my last point: "Bad" money always exists to prevent "good" Bitcoin circulation.
If Bitcoin is a Store of Value, it's desirable, people won't put it in circulation.
Your last points seem not to be a valid point caused by people are seeing something worth based on what condition they have faced it.
When you have considered bitcoin as a store of value, and it's meant if you see bitcoin as a commodity and not a currency. All of your points are conditional.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
Lightning network just solves one problem though (or two, if we count fees + speed of transaction). It doesn't help much with volatility however. Who wants to buy a TV for 1K today, when a month from now that same amount of BTC could be worth 2-5K? Nobody will use BTC as a medium of exchange... they would hold it for speculation.
An exception could be in 3rd world countries where their own fiat fluctuates more than BTC does. I suppose it could catch on as a medium of exchange there with the LN. But other cryptos are probably better suited to that task than BTC is, at least currently.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
Even in the world domination scenario, Bitcoin won't be a medium of exchange. The key is here:
The Bitcoin supply is fixed. But its demand is unpredictable.
Bitcoin will always be desirable because of its fixed supply. Other "bad" money will take it out of circulation.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
eventually this LN will be used in more wallets that we may not even need to create channel anymore but simply send to any address since by default all are using LN. BTC is meant to be spent, to buy products on stores that is why we do have QR codes for it. right now we can send fees already, its not just going to be SOV, it all depend to how you will use it.
You should examine my last point: "Bad" money always exists to prevent "good" Bitcoin circulation.
If Bitcoin is a Store of Value, it's desirable, people won't put it in circulation.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
eventually this LN will be used in more wallets that we may not even need to create channel anymore but simply send to any address since by default all are using LN. BTC is meant to be spent, to buy products on stores that is why we do have QR codes for it. right now we can send fees already, its not just going to be SOV, it all depend to how you will use it.
You should examine my last point: "Bad" money always exists to prevent "good" Bitcoin circulation.
If Bitcoin is a Store of Value, it's desirable, people won't put it in circulation.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
eventually this LN will be used in more wallets that we may not even need to create channel anymore but simply send to any address since by default all are using LN. BTC is meant to be spent, to buy products on stores that is why we do have QR codes for it. right now we can send fees already, its not just going to be SOV, it all depend to how you will use it.
This argument could be valid in future if Bitcoin failed to gain market share and people just decided to use it for store of value, another thing to look at is the lighting network, the success of lighting network is going to determine if BTC is going to be use for medium of exchange because the transaction fees that people complained about that is high is going to be reduced significantly
Bitcoin world domination does not reduce price volatility
To me, that is the biggest flaw with the idea of ever using btc as an everyday currency. And I see no real solution ever presenting itself.
As a store of value, digital gold, sure, btc could work. But as a replacement for fiat, not really, outside of 3rd world nations with hyperinflation. And even there, BTC probably isn't the ideal crypto to use in place of fiat.
For a crypto to catch on as a medium of exchange, first off it needs to be stable. Then it needs to charge less fees than credit cards do, and be just as fast. And consumers will need to be able to use this crypto seamlessly, as easy as other forms of payment, and ideally it'd have to be cheaper to use from a consumer standpoint than a credit card which typically offers 1-5% back. So.... umm... currently no cryptos really qualify, and btc certainly doesn't.
I'm working on Bitflate, a crypto with constant inflation. I think inflation will make price stable and Bitflate token more suitable for transaction. We intentionally make a crypto less "good" so it'll circulate. Inflation discourages HODL behavior so people will put Bitflate token to use. It's an experiment. I'm not sure it'll be able to match fiat efficiency. But it has a chance to address the transaction use case.
The problem with testing that sort of experiment is the coin would need to catch on with the public to even know if it worked or not. And no offense, but it's not like the general public will equate bitflate with btc.
For a coin to be stable, there is a simple (and not so great) solution -- centralization. It'd have to be a stablecoin, backed either by a company or assets.
As a store of value, digital gold, sure, btc could work. But as a replacement for fiat, not really, outside of 3rd world nations with hyperinflation.
Bitcoin would be a very bad replacement for fiat in its current state with long confirmation times especially. You just can't have that situation when you're in line somewhere trying to pay for something, nor would people want to pay network fees, especially high ones when the network is congested.There are other coins that would serve this purpose so much better. Just take a look at how venezuelans are using dash as a currency, and apparently it's working for them down there. I just watched a youtube video about it, and it was amazing.
Bitcoin works as 'digital gold' I guess, tho I wouldn't describe it as that myself.
BTC dominance is far too high and I hardly doubt that an altcoin will replace BTC one day. I prefer to use altcoins, but the majority of investors still believes in Bitcoin and sells all their altcoins to get some extra BTC.
Not even a single percent we have opportunity to pull down the Bitcoin.
FB investors and traders mostly looking to invest on Bitcoin and then ethereum after all this only you will find investment on the various altcoins.
Mobile me your going to convert kryptos to fiat cash that time only we will feel Bitcoin is far far enough.
BTC dominance is far too high and I hardly doubt that an altcoin will replace BTC one day. I prefer to use altcoins, but the majority of investors still believes in Bitcoin and sells all their altcoins to get some extra BTC.
Bitcoin world domination does not reduce price volatility
To me, that is the biggest flaw with the idea of ever using btc as an everyday currency. And I see no real solution ever presenting itself.
As a store of value, digital gold, sure, btc could work. But as a replacement for fiat, not really, outside of 3rd world nations with hyperinflation. And even there, BTC probably isn't the ideal crypto to use in place of fiat.
For a crypto to catch on as a medium of exchange, first off it needs to be stable. Then it needs to charge less fees than credit cards do, and be just as fast. And consumers will need to be able to use this crypto seamlessly, as easy as other forms of payment, and ideally it'd have to be cheaper to use from a consumer standpoint than a credit card which typically offers 1-5% back. So.... umm... currently no cryptos really qualify, and btc certainly doesn't.
I'm working on Bitflate, a crypto with constant inflation. I think inflation will make price stable and Bitflate token more suitable for transaction. We intentionally make a crypto less "good" so it'll circulate. Inflation discourages HODL behavior so people will put Bitflate token to use. It's an experiment. I'm not sure it'll be able to match fiat efficiency. But it has a chance to address the transaction use case.
Jump to: