Topic: The Disadvantages of Bitcoin (Read 239 times)

Well, in general, new breakthroughs are usually considered controversial before the benefits are fully understood by the public.

Basically, believing in bitcoin and blockchain is like believing in something new that can be something very valuable along with its popularity and benefits understood by the public in the future. or vice versa, it won't be anything.

It's important not to just stick on one article. as you said most people here are blatantly pro-bitcoin and the pro-blockchain, and of course, out there are many people who are also openly counter-bitcoin and blockchain.

So, put yourself in the right position, find reasons to believe it or vice versa.

I'm speculating that the OP thought that the topic is still relevant after a year and he admitted that he is a "noob", so let's give me the benefit of the doubt. But its all good at least it was debunked by most experienced members of the community and I hope that the OP has somewhat grasp that the article has been tackled and this so called disadvantage was exposed by @HeRetiK.

@Flor1982 - volatility is not a flaw per se and because bitcoin price depends on supply and demand. Its really hard to see it stabilize. And I don't think we are going to see the price stabilizes because you need to understand that we are still in its infancy.

Volatility is what keeps many investors away and those who do not have high risk ability may not be keen in dealing with bitcoin. This is the main reason that people stay away from the bitcoin and also if government is not supportive and does not legalize it than people may not become part of this crypto currency.

As for an investment then price fluctuation and volatility are one of the disadvantages of Bitcoin that is why this investment is very risky too. As to be use as currency then the delayed transactions and much expensive mining fees are one of the disadvantages in which really need to be address unlike fiat currency that we could use it instantly anytime and anywhere.

And this topic has been repeated a dozens of times and if not maybe a hundred of time not only here in the bitcoin discussion thread but to other thread as well.

Why would anyone post something an article or news that's have been a year old or so before they realized its too late? and there are more important things to tackle instead of this disadvantage thing....

Just a few points to add as well. The article is released last year.

https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-issues/18019/


It was already debunked by DEA:


https://news.bitcoin.com/illegal-activity-use-bitcoin-dea-agent/

The article also mentioned about (psuedo) anonymity, well if he doesn't want to go public because of blockchain, then used mixing services.

The redundancy that is critized in this section is actually what allows Bitcoin to be censorship resistant and permissionless. You don't have to trust, you can verify. And for that one requires utmost transparency. Additionally, the more copies there are, the harder it is to take down.

You may know rendundancy from another, perhaps more familiar concept: Making backups.



There's no debunking of the headline "myth"? Just further critique on the redundancy of blockchains. See above.



I agree that both claims are a myth, but I still wonder what he means by that:


I'm not sure which blockchain he's talking about that "regularly rolls back" but it's definitely not Bitcoin. There are orphan blocks, sure, but they are rather rare and usually don't go further than 1-2 blocks deep.

It is also worth noting that while blockchains themselves are very bad at scaling, the technologies being built on top of them are not.



They do though.


In theory yes, in practice no, due to mining incentives (ie. block subsidies and transaction fees) keeping forces in check.


In theory yes, in practice no, due to the cost of attacking the network now being a thousand times cheaper.


Not really though:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-cyber/thieves-suck-millions-out-of-mexican-banks-in-transfer-heist-idUSKCN1IF1X7
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-city-union-bank-swift/indias-city-union-bank-ceo-says-suffered-cyber-hack-via-swift-system-idUSKCN1G20AF



Centralization is obviously something to keep an eye on, however:


I doubt it's "just four controlling computers" that someone would need to gain access to. I also doubt it's "actually quite feasible" because that would leave me wondering why double spends aren't happening on a regular basis.


...eradicating billions of dollars worth of investment in hardware, infrastructure and developing knowledge. Sure thing.



Rather misinformed.


Not possible without knowing all other address that are under the target's control.


Not possible without knowing all other address that are under the target's control and every counterparty they have been interacting with.

Unless the mother or friend of the author's example happens to have a knack for big data and machine learning I doubt they'll find out all that much about any financial history.

Also...


Oh the humanity! Companies being forced to act transparently and therefore potentially being liable for misconduct, embezzlement and tax evasion! Just imagine if one could see how money flows from companies to shell companies to lobbyists to politicians! Oh geez!

smh.

That being said, some of the scaling solutions that are heading for Bitcoin will improve Bitcoin's privacy (or come at the cost of transparency, depending on how you want to look at things); most notably Lightning Network.

Bitcoin can also be misused by people who want to hide their income from the government, and avoid paying taxes. Not only that, bitcoin also has problems with its technology. First, anyone who has access to a Bitcoin password has the authority to spend the Bitcoins it opens. The loss of passwords means losing all Bitcoin.

Is legalization a problem of bitcoin? I don't think so. Legalization is a problem for the users not a direct problem of bitcoin. Yes, the scalability of bitcoin is one major problem.

The main problems of crypto currency can be solved by improving the source code base and legalization. Indeed, there are complications with scalability. And they need to be solved in order to attract additional users to the ecosystem. Developers are already engaged in this issue and proposed a number of solutions. In our time, there are no insoluble problems.

I'm one of the 'noobs' ok, don't hate me for it.  But I don't have any money in the game yet, either.  I'm considering dumping some in when the time is right, but I'm trying to do my due diligence first.  I'm doing much research and stumbled upon bitcointalk.org, which has provided a vast amount of insight.  So thank you all!

It seems that most people here are overtly pro-bitcoin and pro-the blockchain that is developed underneath it, but I wanted to see the other side to the argument before making a big move, so I stumbled upon this article.  This points out key underlying issues and obstacles the blockchain must overcome to move to where some people expect it to be (a global, decentralized currency) and actually makes a few points suggesting it's not possible.  I want to know what you guys think about it!

https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-issues/18019/

Take a read and let me know what you think.  Thanks!