i keep asking the Cripplecoiners a simple theoretical question which i never get an answer for: if everyone in the world used Bitcoin, wouldn't that be a more effective and more secure form of decentralization for Bitcoin's future?
No.
Everyone (more or less) in the world already uses fiat currencies. If Bitcoin isn't decentralized it is pointless.
surely Bitcoin could displace fiat. it might not have to to become highly successful. nor might it even be desired. but surely it could.
if every person in the world used Bitcoin, that would be the ultimate in decentralization. surely not ubiquitous full node implementation.
This here is the mistake you repeatedly make and I've seen others repeat during the block size debate.
The more correct version is if every capital in the world is held in Bitcoin, that would be the ultimate decentralization.
While it may seem counter-intuitive, more users does not necessarily translate in more value. On the other hand, more money in the system is a sure sign of an healthy network effect. There is more economic incentive to secure and decentralize a network with 1 M users holding 10T$ worth of wealth than 1 B users under a 100 B$ market cap.
This is not Facebook guys, this is a money protocol. When speaking of network effect we should consider the amount of capital that is attracted and not only the number of users.
says the kid who has no experience in anything that i can identify.
why has the current credit card system grown to rapidly? it's b/c it's user friendly. the merchant is the one who has to bear all the risk and cost in terms of basic usage and chargebacks. it's easy to get a cc in this country and to run up credit only to have to pay it back dearly if you aren't on time.
what Bitcoin has done is reverse that entire process by creating a digital cash. all the risk shifts to the buyer for online pmts for goods not delivered as the tx's aren't reversible. dealing with unknown parties is risky. to compensate, multi-sig, pmt processors, and 0conf strategies have had to kick in. up to now, user growth has depended on cheap, reliable fees along with the other compensations. the user growth hasn't been great tho as can be seen in the statistics from places like Overstock and Bitpay.
now, as a result of the continued spam attacks and resulting unconf tx's, users have the one thing that has made Bitcoin great for them being taken away; fast, easy, cheap payments. that is a travesty perpetuated by crippled minds like yours. good luck with ever getting Bitcoin to replace gold's role as the major SOV under these attack conditions. and i am still of the mind that what we're seeing in the data (uninterrupted full block flow, no signif increase in orphans, no signif full node/miner disruption) is
prima facie evidence that the network can handle much bigger blocks than it is now:
) : I think Bitcoin adoption is a slow, hard process and we'll be lucky to increase average usage 8x over the next couple of years. So if 8mb+ is better for others, that's OK by me.
