/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>14071385
you must be new here

>>14071385
loitning network

>>14071395
>loitning network
I have read a bit about it, but it seems unfinished and slow. But why did Satoshi say Bitcoin could already scale in 2010 long before before ln?

>>14071413
He said we could do it with a second layer solution i.e. lightning

>>14071385

Newfags always think bitcoin is some sort of payment processor. Yes, it was described as "digital cash" in the whitepaper. But that's not what gives it value. Lots of things are invented for one purpose but end up actually being useful for something else. Bitcoin's value is that it is the first trustless, decentralized authority that no one person can control or manipulate. In this sense it is the most secure and fairly distributed asset in the world because there is no central point of failure or control over the supply. It can not be censored, stolen, or duplicated.

A digital payment processing system is not a novel idea. Obviously. Visa can actually do like 50,000 tps. Who cares. Anyone can stand up a centralized server to do a bazillion tps. The thing that gives it any value is the underlying asset. There are dozens of payment processing systems being built on top of bitcoin with varying degrees of scale and security. The lightning network is just one of those. Blockchain interoperability solutions like cosmos are another. Think of a separate blockchain that has its own bitcoin address and delegates those bitcoins to holders of a corresponding token on its own chain. Then you can effectively trade bitcoin at the scale of that separate blockchain. This is the side chain idea.

Important thing to understand is that payment processing is just one use case that will be built on top of bitcoin, bitcoin itself is not a payment processing system, it is the underlying asset. If you understand this then you can understand why bitcoin has such incredible value and it has nothing to do with its own transaction rate.

chainlink scales it

>>14071430
Ok, didn't know that. Do you have a link to the post he says it?

>>14071518
Nigger it’s supposed to be literal cash, as in like I have a dollar bill in my hand and I give it to you for your shitty Abba vinyl at a garage sale. It is a private transaction and no one else ever knows. This was the original vision all along.

But because of Core’s stubborness and desire for control instead I hand the “dollar” over, it will take 6 hours to confirm and instead you get an IOU shuffled through some other weird faggots computer, ooh very private and decentralized indeed.

>>14071385
There is a direct trade-off between decentralization and transaction throughput. This is just a property of blockchains.

If anyone tells you they have a decentralized, scalable blockchain, they are lying.

>>14071518
Until quantum works which is days away fggt


Shut the fuck you stupid piece of shit you dont deserve one second of anyone's attention .........hurr durr bitcoin will win against quantum

Fggt

Kys

Plz

>>14071518
BTC was hijacked by idiots like you.
You can't have a store of value without a medium of exchange.
You can't tell users to fuck off and expect to sustain high growth.

>>14071674
>If anyone tells you they have a decentralized, scalable blockchain, they are lying.
Maybe, but it sounds strange to me that Satoshi would lie about this

>>14071713
Because that will be the new meme if Wright is proven to be who he says he is, “satoshi was always a liar, time to move beyond listening to him!”

>>14071385
>He doesnt know about BTC sv

>>14071536
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=287.msg7524#msg7524

>>14071628

Bitcoin was not envisioned to be like cash in those aspects. It is not issued by single entity like a bank or government that can manipulate the supply to fund or encourage certain agendas. Bitcoin is not private either. In fact the entire point is for it to be a transparent ledger and source of trust. This is what differentiated bitcoin from fiat in the whitepaper. But even so, the "original vision" of the creator has no baring on the value of the creation, the value of an asset is determined by supply and demand. And the reason people buy bitcoin now is because its the most secure asset in the world.

>>14071702

There are dozens of way to exchange bitcoin. With varying degrees of security, speed, and centralization. And the available medians for exchange are getting more and more decentralized with greater scale. But in the end the underlying asset will still be bitcoin. The bitcoin blockchain itself will always be more valuable when optimized for security and decentralization over scale.

>>14071687
This guy knows what's up

Google IBM Watson

Get your head out of your ass stupid pokemon coins will crash soon.

>>14071763
"Muh fucking store of value". The only reason it has still value is because there isn't a better scalable blockchain that is as secure as Bitcoin. 10 mins transaction is the cost of it, but at least it's literally the most secure crypto ever for over 10 years now. As soon as a better more scalable crypto comes along(while still maintaining the security of Bitcoin), then suddenly there's no point for Bitcoin anymore. You can do all the mental gymnastics you want with digital gold etc, but at the end the fundamental value is from the actual users.

>>14071713
He probably didn't realize he was wrong. He made that email before he himself created the block size limit. After all, he was the one to add the 1mb constant to prevent transactions being spammed to the network. If there is no limit, nothing stops a malicious party from spinning up a node, and creating a bunch of small transactions to fill up the mempool. Block space is scarce because our bandwidth and storage are scarce. We can debate over the limit, but there has to be one, or there is network spam. And the bigger we make the limit, the more spam there is (but also potentially more real transactions).

Again, it's a balancing act. It's a trade off. There is no correct answer. You just have to shoot for a good balance between decentralization and throughput.

>>14071687
>>14071817
samefag

>>14071763
>There are dozens of way to exchange bitcoin
There are plenty of custodial ways to exchange bitcoin, if you want to transact on chain then you have to pay huge fees that blocks most of the world from using it.
That is not adoption. That is custodial banking 2.0 with ownership only for the elite.
IE it's exactly what we already have. Fuck that vision, it's not worth supporting.

>>14071385
satoshi said that then he introduced 1mb block size cap and forgot to put in an adjusting mechanism.

>>14071749
at least on-chain because ln can do arbitrarily small micropayments now with direct channels.

>>14071385
Lightning network probably stores 2,000 transaction in on BTC on-chain transaction so it scales now.

>>14071881

>>14071991
ln has no limit scaling with direct channels right now. it has one weakness: routing capacity.

>>14071518
>that no one person can control or manipulate
Hasn’t the US issued a list of blacklisted addresses that exchanges aren’t allowed to receive payments from?

>>14072014
ln has many many weaknesses.
Go read the whitepaper or try to cold store on it.

>>14072178
ln is not for cold store you tripple nigger its for micropayments and instantenious retail payments

>>14072191
Yet I can already do both with NANO or BCH without channel fees, watchtowers, liquidity issues, all on chain.

>>14072220
ln is cheaper faster more secure get with the program

>>14072240
Read the whitepaper for ln after reading the original BTC whitepaper (p2p cash). There is a very stark difference in quality and simplicity.
LN is a cool experiment and will lead to significant gains in dapp usability for eth. LN is DOA for BTC, however.

>>14072258
>LN is a cool experiment
it's cool as fuck, but it also has great potentials in many scenarios even if ln routing can not be fixed practically. just imagine having a direct channel to amazon or walmart (because amazon would work with 0-conf really) and getting 5% discount on every purchase by default (that's how much it is cheaper to them than credit cards)

>>14071817
>samefagging on an ID board
lmao

>>14071948

Exchanging via LN or through decentrolized side chains like cosmos isn't "custodial," there is no middle man you have to trust, its an entirely trustless system.

>>14071881
More secure and scalable blockchains already exist, but no one cares. It's less about the tech and more about protecting your investment. More people are in bitcoin, therefore they will fight tooth and nail to protect it. The multi-billion dollar mining industry will also do everything in its power to keep the cash cow alive.

>>14071687
>>14071817
You are pathetic

>>14071881
It should have a proper economical model which is not easy unless you have PoW
Network effect is also very hard to obtainin
Miners have bills to pay and hw to run for 12/18 months until they recover the costs
Basically anything which is not SHA256d scrypt it’s born dead
BTC community is huge and BTC will continue to exists even you don’t like it
Only ETH can be remotely compared

>>14072463

The other issue is that those blockchians either have high inflation, or a large concentration of rent seekers holding tokens or the ability to create tokens or impose fees in the future. What's so valuable about bitcoin is that there is no one who "owns" bitcoin. It is the original and has the most buy in.

>>14071687
>>14071817
holy fuck some genuine samefagging
ok, "sirs"', very wise yes, quantum does the end of bitcoins........was fun when it lastyd, sell sell sell

>>14071893
>Again, it's a balancing act. It's a trade off. There is no correct answer. You just have to shoot for a good balance between decentralization and throughput.

Agreed on this. But decentralization is vastly more valuable than throughput. Especially since interconnections between blockchains will allow for delegation of control of bitcoins to other chains where they can be exchanged at higher throughput, at a trade off for security.

A payment processing solution doesn't even require an underlying currency. Visa has no currency. LN has no currency of its own its just bitcoin. Future DEXs might have some coin to extract some profit for their creators but in the end they will have no significant value compared to the actual assets being exchanged. Coins like bitcoin cash have higher throughput but less security which is why its valued less. The throughput contributes almost nothing to its value.

>>14071385
This thread is honey for nano dicks, DAGs are shit

>>14072630
>DAGs are shit
dags are the future, once they start working in a trustless permisisonless and secure manner. it's just they don't as of yet.

>>14072522
Sure, no one "owns" Bitcoin itself, but I don't find it unique in that regard. And it has by far more rent seekers than any other crypto. Then when you take into account the price of the supposed security was almost $5 billion in 2018, and I struggle to see where the value is.

>>14072658
dags are a meme and can’t scale

>>14072710
actually they should be able to scale a lot better than blockchains. the problem is nobody can do dags permissionless and secure because any p2p reputational system is provably easily sybilled.

Bitcoin was designed to be a reserve currency for the global elite, the high transaction fees are by DESIGN to keep out the poorfags

>>14073111
i wouldn't say that, when the 1mb block limit was introduced it was nowhere near being full. long term scaling debate came a lot later when the blockchain started to bloat to inconvenient size for most users and people started abandoning full network nodes.

>>14073140
Bitcoin market cap is going to 100 trillion unironically, this was also by design

bitcoin was created by a think tank of 160+ IQ experts with master knowledge of game theory

>>14073155
that's just an other unproven unfounded theory in a sea of theories.

what i know for sure is bitcoin may not have been designed as reserve currency but it could function as reserve currency. at least for crypto. because central banks will nothing to do with it. you will see.

>>14071518
thanks for explaining to me why bitcoin is trash. i was almost considering buying some.

>>14071628
Dude, bitcoin is deflationary and scarce. If you want digital cash just use fiat, its stable and doesn't encourage hoarding. Everyone likes to rag on central bankers around here but when it comes to monetary policy they are 100% correct that inflation is the best way to get people to spend. Even if some form of Bitcoin does scale you would be an absolute moron to actually spend it so the point is moot

Thanks for all the replies guys. I just did some more research and found out about Bitcoin SV (BSV). They have already scaled alot and will scale to the size of Visa in july. It alsp turnes out their Chief Scientist Dr. Craig S. Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto. This is very interesting indeed. Strange why no one is talking about this

>>14071385

NEWFAG GO

LEAVE
LEAAAAAAAAAAAVE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>14071881

LOL FAGGOT LURK MOAR

Fantom could do 300k, will do 40k so that it processes instant. It has solved crypto's problem. Better buy fantom op.

>>14071817

Show us your longs in IBM stocks and shorts in BTC you fucking faggot

>>14071881

t. altcoiner faggot whose investments are getting JUST'd right now

How's that scalable blockchain tech working out for ya son

>>14073270
Based and redpilled. In b4 muh pajeetism.

>>14071518
you stupid fucking faggot it was designed to be cash. Just because your dumb nigger faggot ass ascribed it a new use does not mean it is not what it was designed to be.