>>2052309
This. If confirmations aren't timely and reliable, transactions will be held up.
BTC needs to increase block size or find a new consensus model. Neither is a tenable solution for miners, who want to do exactly what they're doing now and don't want to have to deal with new costs or new consensus models, both of which could impact their revenue stream and put them out of business.
LTC was smart, and could well be the solution in the near future as they've already implemented segwit, but we're not going to know until transactions start getting outright dropped. Ether is another possibility, but has a larger attack vector due to dapps, which complicates its adoption (you're not just buying into the currency, you have to buy into the value proposition of potentially insecure dapps being built on the technology).
I think LTC becomes a near-term solution, which will then become antiquated because scalability issues will still exist at some point in the future, and chink miners will cut their nose off to spite their face (NO BROCK SIZE INCREASE BECAUSE TOO EXPENSIVE TO MINE!!!!!)
Fucking retard chinks.