Quote:
Originally Posted by rafiki
Can they fix Bitcoin well enough to solve the inadequacies it has? Or can someone with deep pockets finance a better coin first that gets mass adopted? From 1990 to 1996 there were what, a half dozen search engines before Google? Gotta think this is a similar situation. One of these coins eventually makes Alex richer than God. Does it have to be the first one invented? If we managed for thousands of years to convince people that diamonds are valuable, surely this has a better shot than that.
Bitcoin is unfixable. It's fundamentally flawed. It's not possible to have a digital coin that's:
- Fast enough for point of sale
- Reliable
- Decentralized
- Secure
- Cheap
on current hardware for even 1/100th of the global population.
Bitcoin fails on four of those five at >1/100th of the global population using it to transact. That's a fact.
If you centralize a coin, all problems can be solved and it has all the properties needed of a digital coin. There is talk of doing that in central banks in Europe. This is obviously an ironic and horrible outcome, Bitcoin acting as the prod to usher in the exact opposite of Bitcoin's aims.
Central Bank Digital Currencies will Destroy Bitcoin
Quote:
central banks already have "a centralised permissioned private non-distributed ledger that allows for payments and transactions to be facilitated safely and seamlessly";
by allowing individuals, corporations, and non-bank financial institutions to "make transactions through the central bank," CBDCs would be able to alleviate "the need for cash, traditional bank accounts, and even digital payment services;"
CBDCs would "immediately displace cryptocurrencies" since the latter are not "scalable, cheap, secure, or actually decentralised;"
although some people may wish to use them in order to carry out anonymous transactions, Bitcoin is not that "anonymous", and authorities are likely to "soon crack down on" privacy-focused cryptocurrencies that offer "complete privancy."
Quote:
He says that this means that "the fractional-reserve banking system would be replaced by a narrow-banking system administered mostly by the central bank," which would be a good thing and would allow central banks to be "in a much better position to control credit bubbles, stop bank runs, prevent maturity mismatches, and regulate risky credit/lending decisions by private banks."
It's such an amazing tool of control and monitoring for the centralized EU and countries like China (which wants to move in that direction) that I think it's near certain some kind of digital secure cash system will be adopted at some point. At which point there will be an all out war with decentralized currencies. And they cannot hide due to the need to use a substantial fraction of global electricity output for security. Hell, they even justify as part of a response to "climate change". Regulation alone in the key economies would relegate bitcoin to a tiny market cap, without even any attacks on the system.
That's the long term future. The assclowns like NooseKnots who thought Bitcoin would be $100K now and would eventually become a high value store/payment settlements layer between banks were just delusional.