Before we begin, I’m not just some crypto FUDster. I’ve been in crypto for a long time. My first crypto purchases took place on an exchange called btc-e back in 2014 which later went up the river for laundering funds from the Mt Gox hack. I was a little altcoin degen before most people had even heard the word ‘blockchain’.
A big feature of BTC that there is no upgrade path and it will running for a long time. No BUG can be introduced that way. Thus is very safe compared to other chains. What if there is a BUG in a future ETH / X Y Z chain upgrade?
BTC miners er being build on places with excess energy or wasted energy places and on renewable energy which have lower costs and mining chips are becoming more and more efficient. So the 'leak' to miners probably goes down.
NOBODY is in control of BTC anymore which is big plus IMHO.
BTC is the coin that created and made the crypto space possible.
So If you force me to buy something that has to be around in 20 years. I would buy BTC.
The whole crypto market seems to follow s&p500 more than it follows btc now. And why allow Eth it’s upgrades but not btc? You mentioned future tx fees to supplement mining rewards, but btc has a greater potential and incentive to evolve its core than other chains.
bitcoin did not have lack of scalability, it only had that because a certain sect of early bitcoiners were dead set that maximum DeCeNtRaLiZaTiOn was the number one priority. Not low friction, not low fees and onboarding for transaction volume, etc. That's when they hit the scale ceiling, very very quickly. 1mb block sizes was a ridiculous idea. If you had 20 - 30 globally distributed mining nodes that would be plenty, plus you'd have all the ancillary services contributing to data storage and access, script processing with all bitcoin's original capabilities, etc.
Instead, we have CrippleCoin™ BTC and Lightning, a centralized custodial derivatives network as a 'scaling solution'.
I love Bitcoin but it does worry me sometimes as to where its heading. Your article is compelling and food for thought. Thank you
Awesome article, thanks for writing this. I think ETH has issues of its own (see for example https://senatus.substack.com/p/why-99-of-cryptocurrencies-centralize) but I think your analysis of Bitcoin's (lack of) future is spot on. Kudos.
Great article. Always important to have a bull and a bear point a view before making an investment.
Do Monero ? please ?
Fine article except it will not be Ethereum with it's promises on second layer but Monero which is already working like money on first layer.
Fine article except it will not be Ethereum with it's promises on second layer but Monero which is already working like money on first layer.
A big feature of BTC that there is no upgrade path and it will running for a long time. No BUG can be introduced that way. Thus is very safe compared to other chains. What if there is a BUG in a future ETH / X Y Z chain upgrade?
BTC miners er being build on places with excess energy or wasted energy places and on renewable energy which have lower costs and mining chips are becoming more and more efficient. So the 'leak' to miners probably goes down.
NOBODY is in control of BTC anymore which is big plus IMHO.
BTC is the coin that created and made the crypto space possible.
So If you force me to buy something that has to be around in 20 years. I would buy BTC.
Great analysis and write up. I’m wondering if you might be able to do a similar breakdown of the other “brand” of bitcoin, currently called BSV?
I think Ethereum has a bigger probability of being disrupted (due to its technology and what it is trying to achieve) than Bitcoin.
Sick Forrest, thanks for taking your time into elaborating this
The whole crypto market seems to follow s&p500 more than it follows btc now. And why allow Eth it’s upgrades but not btc? You mentioned future tx fees to supplement mining rewards, but btc has a greater potential and incentive to evolve its core than other chains.
bitcoin did not have lack of scalability, it only had that because a certain sect of early bitcoiners were dead set that maximum DeCeNtRaLiZaTiOn was the number one priority. Not low friction, not low fees and onboarding for transaction volume, etc. That's when they hit the scale ceiling, very very quickly. 1mb block sizes was a ridiculous idea. If you had 20 - 30 globally distributed mining nodes that would be plenty, plus you'd have all the ancillary services contributing to data storage and access, script processing with all bitcoin's original capabilities, etc.
Instead, we have CrippleCoin™ BTC and Lightning, a centralized custodial derivatives network as a 'scaling solution'.