Actually holders of these whales deserve the benefits, because they take a big risk, and there is no need to limit the ownership of each user and Bitcoin holder. And I think it's the market itself that adjusts this imbalance. the real problem of this mass Bitcoin adoption comes from Governments slowing the growth of Bitcoin, and this lack of awareness about Bitcoin knowledge is also a barrier to Bitcoin adoption.
And there is also what happens among the general public, the government spreads negative news about Bitcoin, of course it hinders most people from knowing and learning about Bitcoin, the government plays a very important role in inhibiting the adoption of Bitcoin, but if the government participates in providing positive knowledge to the community, I believe the center of the problem this will be quickly and easily resolved.
Topic: Problem with mass adoption of Bitcoin - page 3. (Read 758 times)
Let's assume that there's really set of people or groups or what we call whales that are manipulating the market. We're all just talking about it with words but we can't prove it.
By the means of manipulation, we'll all agree that it's in the form of mass media. Those bad news and FUD that has been made through there, it's really the triggering factor that brings fear to most investors and holders of bitcoin.
By the means of manipulation, we'll all agree that it's in the form of mass media. Those bad news and FUD that has been made through there, it's really the triggering factor that brings fear to most investors and holders of bitcoin.
Your friend is stupid for trusting those self proclaimed Bitcoin expert and you're also stupid by trusting your friends' opinion without doing any research first. It's true rich people and whales will hold huge amount of Bitcoin, but you need to know if Bitcoin price is currently $20,000 and there's a whales want to buy all of Bitcoin, the price of those 18 Million Bitcoin isn't $20,000 because each time he bought the coins, there's a people will not sell it for such price and will offer for higher price.
Which mean either whales are have huge amount Bitcoin or not, it will increase Bitcoin price.
Which mean either whales are have huge amount Bitcoin or not, it will increase Bitcoin price.
A massive whale tried this in the early days.... creating a huge "Sell" Wall..... but people stuck together and they slowly chipped away at it.. until it was destroyed. That only happened on one exchange, if I remember correctly ...and things went back to normal within a couple of days.
So the Bitcoin community are pretty resilient when it comes to things like that.... when we are faced with a challenge, we stand together and we ride it out and just continue driving forward.
So the Bitcoin community are pretty resilient when it comes to things like that.... when we are faced with a challenge, we stand together and we ride it out and just continue driving forward.
Quote
He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.
They don't shock "the entire system". They shock the Bitcoin market. Learn to differentiate the Bitcoin blockchain from the Bitcoin market.
I actually don't believe that large BTC demand and widespread adoption are coming. Bitcoin cannot become a true global currency, that is being used by billions of people. I think that Bitcoin will remain a volatile financial asset used by risk taking investors to make speculative profits.
The crypto whales didn't cause the current crypto winter. Their ability to manipulate the Bitcoin price had decreased since 2017. I'm sure that at least 90% of all Bitcoin whales want a high Bitcoin price and a bull market, not the opposite.
Firstly, did your friend really say this or is this your opinion? Secondly, this sort of arrangement is inevitable no matter how you try to change things up. Restricting BTC access is dumb and silly if you think about it.
Stuff like this won't hinder mass adoption. What would actually hinder it is constant negativity in various forms.
Stuff like this won't hinder mass adoption. What would actually hinder it is constant negativity in various forms.
I think it is important to get our facts straight before making such assessments.
How do you define "bitcoin adoption"?
Let's say 50% of the population owns some satoshis but they only hold them, would you call that adoption? Or... This time it is only the 20% of the population owning bitcoin but this time they are using it actively to purchase stuff.
Which one would you call "real" adoption?
When you can answer this question, you can find your answer of your own question.
How do you define "bitcoin adoption"?
Let's say 50% of the population owns some satoshis but they only hold them, would you call that adoption? Or... This time it is only the 20% of the population owning bitcoin but this time they are using it actively to purchase stuff.
Which one would you call "real" adoption?
When you can answer this question, you can find your answer of your own question.
The price of bitcoin is never in the hands of retail investors
The biggest problem is still the government, if the government accepts it as legal and declares that bitcoin is a currency or a worth asset holding, then I believe all other problems will be solved. Government is the biggest hurdle that bitcoin is facing, just solve the government, bitcoin will be widely accepted. But that possibility is improbable unless the government sees some interest in accepting bitcoin.
It is also possible that bitcoin will change the financial sector, or it could remain anonymous, and decentralized. While mass adoption has often been seen as the ultimate goal of crypto, we may instead be planning for a future that allows those who value privacy and security to keep their preferred cryptocurrencies. I don't see any problem here for the government but as we all know that our traditional financial sector will come up with something unique to hinder the adoption. what hinders adoption are some of the regulations implemented by each government. Different countries will have different regulations. the current traditional financial steering wheel is also well developed, Fiat also uses digital money to make transactions faster. As well as bitcoin which is a decentralized digital asset or not regulated by anyone, it is still the second digital currency after Fiat. Adoption will continue as long as the government supports cryptocurrencies without providing strict regulation. Governments don't like privacy and security, they need to be able to figure it all out.
I reckon any dumps would only temporarily send the market into a change, especially if it has stabilized into the long term (enough to the point where people who accept it can reliably use it as currency without a huge fear of its volatility), and as time passes by, said changes would gradually have its impacts lessen as well imo. As for the proposed change, as others have said, there's really no negative connotation to apply it, heck it may only apply more negatives than the positives (if any) it could bring. I reckon it may kill the value and idea (which is freedom) of Bitcoin itself as well.
It's a problem, but it's also a problem that can be solved with time, so I don't think it's actually a problem we need to worry about at all.
It's a problem, but it's also a problem that can be solved with time, so I don't think it's actually a problem we need to worry about at all.
I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.
It is impossible for the system to limit someone from holding a certain amount of Bitcoin. Because this goes against the decentralized concept of Bitcoin. If the system restricts someone from holding a certain amount of Bitcoin, then it is more to the concept of centralization. The purpose of creating Bitcoin is to avoid the centralization that other financial methods use.Quote
I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?
In my opinion Bitcoin is one of the projects with very fast and widespread adoption compared to other projects. If we measure the age of Bitcoin, it has only reached 13 years and 11 months, or a week less than 14 years. But now Bitcoin users are spread all over the world. Even some countries have legalized the use of Bitcoin. Other data that we can make as a reference for the widespread use of Bitcoin is the speed at which the number of Bitcoins has been successfully mined. The remaining Bitcoins are less than 2 million Bitcoins. My estimate is that by 2027 all Bitcoin stocks that can be mined will be exhausted, until 2030 at the latest. Other data we can also compare exchanges by country, automatically, the use of Bitcoin will be widespread among the people in the work area of the exchange. The biggest problem is still the government, if the government accepts it as legal and declares that bitcoin is a currency or a worth asset holding, then I believe all other problems will be solved. Government is the biggest hurdle that bitcoin is facing, just solve the government, bitcoin will be widely accepted. But that possibility is improbable unless the government sees some interest in accepting bitcoin.
It is also possible that bitcoin will change the financial sector, or it could remain anonymous, and decentralized. While mass adoption has often been seen as the ultimate goal of crypto, we may instead be planning for a future that allows those who value privacy and security to keep their preferred cryptocurrencies. I don't see any problem here for the government but as we all know that our traditional financial sector will come up with something unique to hinder the adoption. what hinders adoption are some of the regulations implemented by each government. Different countries will have different regulations. the current traditional financial steering wheel is also well developed, Fiat also uses digital money to make transactions faster. As well as bitcoin which is a decentralized digital asset or not regulated by anyone, it is still the second digital currency after Fiat. Adoption will continue as long as the government supports cryptocurrencies without providing strict regulation. Governments don't like privacy and security, they need to be able to figure it all out.
The biggest problem is still the government, if the government accepts it as legal and declares that bitcoin is a currency or a worth asset holding, then I believe all other problems will be solved. Government is the biggest hurdle that bitcoin is facing, just solve the government, bitcoin will be widely accepted. But that possibility is improbable unless the government sees some interest in accepting bitcoin.
It is also possible that bitcoin will change the financial sector, or it could remain anonymous, and decentralized. While mass adoption has often been seen as the ultimate goal of crypto, we may instead be planning for a future that allows those who value privacy and security to keep their preferred cryptocurrencies. I don't see any problem here for the government but as we all know that our traditional financial sector will come up with something unique to hinder the adoption. I was chatting about Bitcoin's impact and effects with a few friends today. My friends discuss the impact that Bitcoin whales are having on the adoption of Bitcoin. In the coming years, according to Bitcoin experts, adoption will increase. He claimed that 3.7 million coins are lost, with the remaining coins being held on chains by early adopters.
He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.
However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.
I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?
Happy Christmas 🎄🎄
Ofcourse yes, bitcoin early adopters or basically what people usually call the whales have stacks of btc purchased at very less prices. Obviously these have the power to manipulate the market in whichever direction they want. But the idea behind bitcoin is that the value of bitcoin shouldn't be pegged in anywhere infact the pricing of commodities should be in bitcoin itself. If this will happen even the whales won't be able to do anything as they won't be able to easily manipulate the value of bitcoin then. He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.
However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.
I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?
Happy Christmas 🎄🎄
There are a few people with a couple thousand bitcoin in their wallets which in any laymen defines them as a whale, however I don't think that is the case, with still millions and millions of bitcoin in circulation and mining one bitcoin only getting harder and harder, the power scale will once again tip to the general majority, not that it's in favor of the whales in the first place. Whales only have impact on a coin if its following is filled with daytraders and weakhands. As for bitcoin almost everyone here who owns one knows it's best not to be swayed into whatever bidding the whales call so I don't think they really impede anything.
Asking For a regulation is just like asking to make Bitcoin centralized and that will be defiling the main purpose and concept of Bitcoin creation.
There are people who will definitely have greater advantage on whatever area of life because they were the grassroot members who through thick and thin has believed in Bitcoin right from the very first year of inception up till now and might have taken time to accommolate a while lot of Bitcoin and even upto till now dey are still accommolating and they shouldn't be blamed for that and there are also people who are still striving to buy more of Bitcoin from scratch and take advantage of ever bear market to buy more Bitcoin who are already aiming for greater amounts of Bitcoin in a certain period of time.
There are people who will definitely have greater advantage on whatever area of life because they were the grassroot members who through thick and thin has believed in Bitcoin right from the very first year of inception up till now and might have taken time to accommolate a while lot of Bitcoin and even upto till now dey are still accommolating and they shouldn't be blamed for that and there are also people who are still striving to buy more of Bitcoin from scratch and take advantage of ever bear market to buy more Bitcoin who are already aiming for greater amounts of Bitcoin in a certain period of time.
Somehow I actually see the OP's idea centered, but maybe that's because I'm a bit paranoid. Since no authority can control bitcoins, it is of course a completely decentralized system. We are too stupid to allow ourselves to stay centered with rules and desires with guaranteed levels of security including price stability. This is definitely not true, in fact the market will not be controlled if no one is playing in it.
Bitcoin adoption has only been disrupted and hampered by government regulations, but of course there are several other points that could be justified and I might disagree if whale ownership is one of them.
Bitcoin adoption has only been disrupted and hampered by government regulations, but of course there are several other points that could be justified and I might disagree if whale ownership is one of them.
He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.
However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.
I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?
Happy Christmas 🎄🎄
Your suggestion constitutes making the Bitcoin network centralized. Making a limit on an individual's bitcoin holding is nothing but dictatorship. This goes against the ideal of freedom, Bitcoin wanted to convey. Bitcoin at its current state of distribution is almost perfect. Besides, people who put more effort into Bitcoin are rewarded accordingly. Your suggestion discourages extra effort and will most probably hinder the growth of Bitcoin because your idea caps the opportunity and capacity of every individual to acquire more Bitcoin. You are removing the competition that gives life to the marketplace and the growth of Bitcoin price and value.
You wanted to avoid manipulation but instead, implement manipulation at its core.
~Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.
It is impossible for BTC to overcome centralized authority since the market is open and free for everyone to buy as much btc as they can afford.
The problem with adoption is not just because the whales or centralized authorities have access to a large amount of btc to manipulate the market but also because the majority of investors (whether small or big) see btc as a speculative asset than an alternative currency. So what needs to change is peoples perception.
Bitcoin is always growing and introducing new kind of use cases every day. Mass adoption does not come with a problem. People will still have traditional fiat currency for regular buy, sell of products. And if the people who hold a huge portion of bitcoin (not confirmed yet) decides to manipulate the market, then there will always be other people willing to do the opposite. Such as, pump in price by whales - people will sell. Dump in price by whales - people will buy.
And those who are holding for decades now, won't let go of their holdings. That's just how I see the market.
And those who are holding for decades now, won't let go of their holdings. That's just how I see the market.
Jump to: