Topic: The 5 big problems with Bitcoin / blockchain everyone should be aware of (Read 215 times)

I agree with all the points, but the environmental consequences have everything to which a person touches, so this point is unreasonable.

Some update regarding regulation and restriction on trading:

"The Israeli Supreme Court reached a decision today in the crypto space, requiring banks to allow trading, and prohibiting them from limiting the bank accounts of companies associated with the industry.

The court issued a temporary court order to prohibit Israel’s Leumi Bank from limiting in any capacity the bank account of Israeli crypto company Bits of Gold, which acts as a broker (exchange) in facilitating the buying and selling of digital assets."

The Supreme Court’s decision, that has been described as “precedent-setting,” means that banks in general cannot limit accounts associated with the crypto industry.

https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/news/israeli-supreme-court-backs-crypto-forces-banks-allow-trading/

 "Yes, "The Establishment", like  the owners at Forbes has a vested interest in all crypto currencies failing, which is why the produce articles like this that purport so many problems. Their goals to keep people from getting involved and they're using scare tactics (FUD) to do so." This has been exactly my reaction to this article. As soon as Bitcoin popularity in the society hugely depends on news of all kinds and having in mind that crypto topic is very hot and has a great potential to attract clicks and likes, such business magazines are kin to use any means to manipulate a public opinion and gain more of their own popularity from it.

As for the environment, bitcoin does not carry any danger to the environment, only draws on the resource of electricity. Cuts and even greater harm are caused to the nature by cutting down the forest for the sake of banknotes.

These certain areas mentioned can easily be conquered only if the users themselves have the initiative to learn the ropes and try to use the tech without being overwhelmed by the technical jargon associated in bitcoin/crypto. Banking services isn't easy either, and most of the time the banks rip off people with those hideous "terms and conditions/regulations" upon using their services whereas in bitcoin, it doesn't do that; you basically have full control on your money.

Point 3 is easily countered since it is also hard to do financial activities with the banks; point 4 is also countered since bank and wire transfers take business days to be completed and no services can be made during holidays whereas bitcoin takes minutes/hours.

That is a good point and just adds to the list of unique benefits of bitcoin in particular and blockchain in general. It even goes further to cover identity management that can help empower people in regions where the majority of citizens are not in possession of any documents so even if they had access to banks could not open an account. In this case bitcoin helps in two ways to provide access to financial instruments but also to a digital identity for purposes beyond financial transactions.

What it fails to mention is that not everyone has access to banking services thanks to all the red tape that surrounds them. Even those that do have access to their services have to go through a bunch of red tape. Bitcoin addresses these problems by putting you in control of your own money. I do understand that not many people have any problems with the banking system though, so it's true that adoption on this end could take a while.

Either way, the article does make good points, but it seems a little one-sided. Then again, I guess it's supposed to highlight problems (and potential problems), which it does do.

Well in the very unlikely case of strict regulations by all or the majority of countries that is actually the worst threat to bitcoin. If countries make exchanges illegal then you can buy or sell bitcoin (exchange it against fiat) and some countries are even attempting to restrict the online use of bitcoin. That would certainly be the end of bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.

I think that it is better to accept and determine what kind of asset this is. For this to happen, the state must take some action. Otherwise, the crypto currency will remain more than fantastic for most people.

The main problem is that it is still unknown to which class it belongs. To what class of acts. There is no legal basis for this phenomenon so far. And he is either accepted or denied as a currency.

Overall not some bad points you made, but there isn't anything there that hasn't already been overcome or won't be overcome in the future!

1. Bitcoin / Blockchain has an environmental cost. Response: Obviously how else is Bitcoin going to be mined and secured? The cost used for this however is less than idle phones, computers, tablets in the world. There are higher energy consumption problems out there, Bitcoin isn't the worst.
2. Lack of regulation creates a risky environment. Response: Of course it does but over regulation would stifle the progress we are making here, and we don't want that either.
3. Its complexity means end users find it hard to appreciate the benefits. Response: Perhaps, but this is why the onus is one us to help those who do not currently understand. Education is paramount here!
4. Bitcoin / Blockchains can be slow and cumbersome. Response: Not anymore, you seen the mempool the last couple of weeks? It is as cheap if not cheaper than Bcash currently. Can send 1 Bitcoin for 15 cents.
5. The “Establishment” has a vested interest in Bitcoin/ blockchain failing. Response: Sure it does, but they would stand to gain more if they invest and it suceeds (hint they are already doing this!)

Those points are a stretch across the board, and very easily argued against. Not to mention they're all actively being addressed by innovation and alt coins.

The user must understand the technology. Otherwise, it is better not to approach even the world of crypto-currency. Not possessing sufficient knowledge, he runs a lot of risk.

I do not agree with one of the points. Regulation by the state can only spoil bitcoin. This will affect the cost. There will be taxes. There may be illegal activity here. But it is everywhere. Both on the Internet and in the real world.

Initiatives such as improved technology (lightning network, etc) as well as hardware (moose's law) will provide some relief there.

I agree with all the points that are mentioned. But the most annoying characteristic it is the complexity and as a result the slow transactions and mining. More coins are produced more difficult it become to operate them.

Yes I agree and I thought about even reading it, but a) Forbes has published some well balanced articles on the subject in the past and b) most beginners in the space will be very likely confronted with all of those "arguments" by their friends.

On the five points everyone here in this forum is pretty much on the same side - understandably.

agree with your opinion. the point is, everything that we choose certainly has its advantages and disadvantages.

When an user has a clear understanding about the bitcoin /blockchain technology it won't cause a big problem. As blockchain is in its early days of implementation, even a small mistake leads to a big problem. More the knowledge, more will be the good thing happening with bitcoin/blockchain technology.

I'm always skeptical when a business news source is making opinions about Bitcoin or related technology.

This is a non-event. It's drama made up by the press to sell "clicks". Fiat currency printing operations require electricity, although no one calls that out as a reason to abandon fiat currency. The people who drive the Investment Markets use planes, cars and electricity to conduct their deals and trades, yet no one uses that as a reason to proclaim "we shouldn't use this market!"

Sure. But is it more risking than centralizing decision making among a few powerful men and women that can make said decisions using emotion or the influence of personal gain? History provides many great examples of how regulation or laws have spurred human action that has left the financial system in peril. The co-mingling of retail and investment banks, regulation, was one of the drivers of the mortgage-driven financial crisis of 2008.

How many people who use the Dollar or the Euro understand fractional lending that drives our current bank-to-bank financial system? Very few.

Do people need to understand how the internet works to leverage the benefits of an online news site or the use of email? No.

If "complexity" is a reason to not pursue progress we'd still be riding horses, fetch water by the pale, and spending most of our day hunting and gathering for food.

Yes, absolutely. And this drives innovation, which takes time. That innovation will either occur with Bitcoin (i.e,. the Lightning Network), or view new crypto currencies.

Let's not forget that blockchain technology may take hours to pass a transaction, where the current banking system takes DAYS (and it better not be one a weekend!) to settle a transaction.

Yes, "The Establishment", like the owners at Forbes has a vested interest in all crypto currencies failing, which is why the produce articles like this that purport so many problems. Their goals to keep people from getting involved and they're using scare tactics (FUD) to do so.