Topic: Bitcoins and other cryptos will never become mainstream before... - page 4. (Read 679 times)

Using it for purchases is the final phase of hard money adoption. First Bitcoin was a tech experiment, then it was a risky get rich quick scheme, then it was the best investment on the planet, now its between its investment phase and savings phase. Once people have been saving in Bitcoin for a good number of years then they'll feel comfortable spending it. Right now its still too early in adoption to spend for most people because why spend something that is gonna go up 5x in the next couple years.

2030s and 2040s is when we'll see the transition to starting to actually spend it. So in the meantime we have time for those point of sales to get built on and adopted. By that time Bitcoin volatility will be much lower, hundreds of millions of people will have saved/grown a lot of money with Bitcoin, and they'll be ready to start spending. Afterall the whole point of savings it to eventually spend it.

Bitcoin has grown into something else, or at least it has more than one function now. It isn't anymore just the internet money that it used to be mainly about. I don't know whether the thing that paves way for monkeys and punks and rocks and shrooms is essentially a bug or a vulnerability or a feature, but it seems obvious to me that Bitcoin is primarily for monetary or financial purposes. Now, it's kind of funny and sad how the main purpose has to take the alternate route, the layer 2, because the main network is busy with inscriptions.

It would not feel like a waste if spending bitcoin on mundane things was normalized and everyone else was doing it

Of course now, with high transaction fees, you would not think to buy a product as simple as a bottle of water with bitcoin but if bitcoin were to be developed for the better and reduce the high fees and have its value be stable then it would act more as a currency and less as an investment

Bitcoin is still quite risky with high price volatility, if it is used as the world's main cash flow it will not be good.
Bitcoin is still the most sought-after digital currency and is becoming optional for payments other than Fiat in countries that fully accept Bitcoin.

Bitcoin also has a scarcity and Bitcoin supply is only 21 Million BTC available,
but not all of them are in circulation and some are buried in abandoned wallets.

But of course it is different from gold because Bitcoin does not have a physical form.
Gold as a Safe Haven Asset is quite popular, but Bitcoin cannot be used as a Safe Haven Asset because of its rapid fluctuations.

---

Yes, and in the modern era like today, Online transactions are needed, Bitcoin is a good option for Online payments and ecommerce.
But Bitcoin's current problem is scalability, which has recently been paralyzed by an increasingly dense buildup of transactions and this has brought traffic jams with fees rising dramatically.
The Lightning network could be a solution, but there are those who oppose it and development is also lacking.

The reality is that, why should people be buying water bottles with Bitcoin? If we consider the practicality of it all, why should we choose Bitcoin as payment for our cup of coffee? Sometimes I wonder whether those videos of children buying a piece of banana or a glass of lemonade using Bitcoin is the best way to promote Bitcoin. Cold cash would be best. Perhaps Bitcoin's whitepaper is where the point is, that it is an electronic cash, that it is for online payments, for eCommerce purposes.

I agree with all of that. I am sure that the current we face in the future will not be one hundred percent the same as what we saw before, even though the analysis parameters always say that this will happen again, the fact is that every year or season will change and how society accepts crypto also has an impact on all of this. . What is most likely is that we have to be clever at dealing with the problems that society offers us as crypto experts, how do we solve those problems, then crypto will be easily adopted by society, easily known and used by them. This will create a positive new trend that has never happened before.

I don't think bitcoin needs to become the mainstream of world money because bitcoin is still not effective for that. In addition, even though Bitcoin is not the world's main currency, this will not affect its value. We can see that gold used to be gold as currency, now it no longer exists but the value of gold is not affected even though it is no longer currency, gold always has its own value because of the trust and rarity of gold. This applies to bitcoins

Well, I couldn't agree more that on the early days of Bitcoin it is highly unlikely that we see it on the mainstream. But within just a few years of this continuous market and adoption, we're seeing that it is the institutions that are doing their own thing for doing mass adoption of Bitcoin. While there will be debates that these institutions aren't for the tech and decentralization because they are obvious into centralization. What do we ask for? This type of adoption that comes from the mainstream and financial institutions themselves that are speaking and defending Bitcoin.

Well, that's true but I don't see it as a problem. I would never want to simply spend my BTC, it's an investment for me. And buying water or food with would feel like a waste of it.

Your concern regarding Bitcoin's popular adoption is its everyday utility. History: conventional currencies evolved over ages. Bitcoin, meanwhile, is young. Not simply buying water bottles, but establishing an infrastructure that integrates digital currencies into daily life. This is gradual and complicated.

Your political point is important. Current financial systems and governments may oppose decentralized currencies. Remember that innovation generally confronts resistance before adoption. The internet, once innovative, is now essential. Blockchain technology might disrupt finance and other industries, disrupting power systems.

The potential alien civilization parallel is crazy. It emphasizes that social and legislative constraints limit us, not technology. Blockchain technology can be universally adopted with a perception and regulatory shift. Bitcoin's general acceptance is a marathon that requires patience, ingenuity, and social change.

We need to wait for a longer, 20 to 30 years from the date of 2010, until we decide whether Bitcoin is here to continue or whether it will end. The technology is still new and people are still ignorant of the meaning of Bitcoin and its importance as a financial instrument alongside all of the available financial instruments, and it may be the backbone of international trade. Bitcoin is now in the growth phase. If it succeeds in having a large number of users, acceptable fees, speed in transactions and continuous development, and it continues until 2030, then we can judge the future.

Well, Bitcoin is an asset, but not just an asset, it's an asset that has reached the level of acceptability and high liquidity that no other asset has ever achieved in a very short space. We can say the same of Ethereum at the same time, and a few lots of them. But I would like to limit the scope of crypto right now to Bitcoin and Ethereum. The two are now in the mainstream of the financial market which is the main thing when it comes to their asset class. They are not the direct country's money so you don't expect them to be spent on the street. Bitcoin itself has done the undone, now you can still buy some things directly with Bitcoin, after all, you don't hold paper BTC, you make your electronic transactions online, and you can't expect everyone to buy biscuits or sweets on the street with it.

Do you know how many people transact with Bitcoin daily despite the transaction fee challenges? This is a coin that has done enough in a very short time and I do not think anyone should want more from it. Come to think of it, Gold has lived for centuries and is even used as a medium of transactions by some people, has it gotten to the level of financial transactions of Bitcoin online? Or has it been spent on the street yet? These are different asset classes that you can easily change to your fiats and spend it anyhow you want, not otherwise as you thought. It has killed many fiat transactions online in case you don't know, everything must not be physical spending. For Bitcoin to have even done more than that, it deserves kudos already.

How much groceries did your friend  buy that he opted to pay with bitcoin in this era of high transaction fees?. Did he buy and  paid double because I believe the transaction fees of that purchase he made may even be above the purchase or seemingly equal to it,
Secondly, how long did he have to wait before his transactions was confirmed before leaving the grocery store or was he allowed to go and the store owner notify him upon receipt?.
Thirdly, is there a way around that time  and fees factors of  the transactions that I don't know about that he's fully aware of, please  @Manny@11111 I'm really curious and  will appreciate your kind responses. Thanks

There are two things wrong here and people only responded to one of them so far.
The obvious one that when we talk about adoption we aren't talking about a situation when you can buy anything anywhere at any time. That would be more like replacing fiat which is not the goal.

The other one that nobody addressed is that altcoins will never become mainstream or even be used as long as their purpose is to be pumped and dumped. For years the altcoin creators only made new projects to make money themselves, hence the premines and ICOs and PoS and so on. Until that changes, we won't see "other cryptos" ever be used for anything meaningful.

They actually were discussing this like 5 years ago. But instead of water it was coffee. They want bitcoin to be used to be able to buy a cup of coffee. And you basically can’t do that with the main net. Even if fees were low, you would still have to wait 10-30 mins for confirmation.

That’s why all these layer 2 solutions are happening. Basically keep a small amount of bitcoin in a l2 and you can spend all you want with little or no fees. When you are done, just bridge back.

Not everything valuable can buy water bottles. For example, you can't buy a water bottle with the Internet as a technology, only through the Internet on specific platforms. You can't buy a water bottle with a smartphone, either, even though it's an invention that reached global adoption fast.
Bitcoin is an alternative to fiat, another way to do money, so to speak. Bitcoin is also a valuable asset.
I don't think that the main issue is the resistance of major actors like governments, banks, or lobbyists. Bitcoin is volatile, Bitcoin doesn't scale well, Bitcoin transactions are irreversible, there's nobody to blame for Bitcoin going up or down, and Bitcoin transaction fees regularly rise too high. There are enough reasons for people to prefer fiat and banks over Bitcoin, simply because there's someone in charge, there are some ways of controlling the value, fiat tends to be stable (generally more stable than Bitcoin), etc. Not everyone wants decentralization, financial freedom and responsibility that comes with it.

If you use LN, then you don't have to worry about the fees, but the fact that so many people complain about the fees is really strange, considering that there is more than one alternative.


You really turned things upside down, because it is not possible to pour Bitcoin into a bottle, but in a situation where you are terribly thirsty and you only have Bitcoin, wouldn't you buy a bottle of cold water and pay even $10 for the fee? I would really like to see those hardened holders who would rather die than spend Bitcoin.

As for the water bottle example, you are bothered by details, most variables of btc aren't linked to deep physical limitations. The current btc is not suitable for such a transaction ofc, but that's irrelevant to the possibilities of blockchain.

Really, be it a water bottle or a Playstation 5, or a Ford F-Series, the physical goods market evade cryptos and that's the only challenge for it's growth. Humans need fuel to live, and they but it with fiat. And the reason is political otherwise you would have a plethoric amount of entrepreneurs willing to accept blockchain powered money for their products. Elon Musk tried it for a time with tesla, there's little doubt why he dropped the opportunity.

West Africans and Hindus getting access to internet won't make a huge difference also c'mon.

Restraining blockchain powered money to a digital stuff used to buy nfts, steroids and cocaine online or evade tax but no physical good such as water bottle is exactly buying into the establishment narrative about cryptos.

You know bitcoin is for people who believe in it and will work it out so they can have it in the future. Although everyone can do it, not everyone has the dedication and passion to work out. So the tendency is always that, in the end, most of those who enter this industry fail.

So, stand up for what you believe in Bitcoin. But if you use Bitcoin just for the bottle of water, it seems like you are just wasting every bit of bitcoin because of the value it can provide in the future.

OP you should also understand that bitcoin and crypto are still very new from their launch until now, requiring a widespread acceptance is not an immediate story but takes time.

You can imagine the problem of the Internet, after many years, it took us to have the current popular network system that you see, but the truth is that not everyone has the Internet and even Some countries still don't have electricity to use it. So, looking openly, with bitcoin and crypto since its launch until now, its scale is much larger, and I think at a speed that is really fast, it won't take too long so that you can witness some regions accepting crypto as a popular means of life, and there is no need to impose too much on how to use bitcoin because in the end, the core thing is still bitcoin.