Global IT outage shows dangers of cashless society, campaigners say
Global IT outage shows dangers of cashless society, campaigners say
Cash provides essential fallback when digital payments break down, Payment Choice Alliance points out
You're viewing a single thread.
Bitcoin wasn't down. Hasn't had a single hour of downtime or hack since it started 15 years ago in 2008. No bank holidays. Clear and transparent supply, 100% open source code. Not run by any single government, corporate board, or CEO. Sends money across the globe in under a second for pennies in fees, all you need is a phone. Powerful stuff.
As long as you ignore its problems it's great. I'm sure you do.
Meanwhile the rest of us who don't live in cloud Cuckoo land have to deal with your shitty system that takes 45 minutes to process a transaction and requires the burning down of several rainforests per transaction. So we can see it is probably not a good idea.
This is why Taler was created. It is a payment system not a payment form
45 minutes to process a transaction and requires the burning down of several rainforests per transaction.
Don't listen to people who are critical of a thing if they clearly don't even understand the basics of how it works. On main chain, a Bitcoin transaction typically take up to ten minutes (the time between blocks). It can take longer if you set a super low fee, but you can guarantee your payment goes into the next block by paying an average fee, usually around $0.75. Your wallet does this all automatically.
On lightning where most transactions occur these days (secured by main chain) transactions settle fully in under a second. Do your own research.
Besides, we all know Bitcoin only takes a single rainforest per transaction, it's been that way since the great rainfork which is ancient history at this point.
I've had bitcoin transactions that literally took several days to process. This was also using an average fee. The more people using bitcoin, especially to handle common every-day transactions, the worse this problem would get.
I’ve had bitcoin transactions that literally took several days to process. This was also using an average fee.
I use Bitcoin regularly, this has literally never happened to me. If your transaction took days either you accidentally set a super low fee or your wallet was bugged somehow. Generally speaking the only way an "average fee" transaction takes more than a block or two is if you pay an average fee right before a rare massive fee spike, in which case, you can do a "replacement" transaction by upping the fee or just wait. Look up "average Bitcoin transaction fees" if you want to see rarity and size of fee spikes.
A handful of minutes or hours in a high-fee scenario, btw, is still much faster than ACH or international wires. Even if the money appears to move that quickly with traditional banking, full settlement is often measured in days to weeks, ask any vendor whose had a chargeback or anybody whose tried to "withdraw" from their Venmo right after depositing to it. Bitcoin's main chain and Fedwire (used to settle liquidity between US banks) have equivalent daily transaction capacity.
You can open a lightning channel with a single on-chain transaction. That lightning channel can stay open for years and process trillions of transactions, instantly, for pennies in fees. If you need a transaction done quickly, you shouldn't be sending it on main chain to begin with.
Long-term the vision is for folks to be using lightning or other L2s for everyday transactions, not main chain. Most Bitcoin transactions by transaction count are already on lightning. Lightning has been out for 5+ years now. It works well and gets better every year.
I see this comment every now and then, and it always forgets the cost of the transaction, confirmation time, and of course, the need for miners to exist to process these confirmations/transactions. The energy cost is extraordinary, and the end user is taxed for the use of their own dollars.
It's not really feasible on a broad scale. Bitcoin is a holding stock, not a valid currency. Its value only increases because it manufactures its own scarcity. And as its scarcity increases, it naturally moves toward centralization since mining becomes too large an activity for the individual to reap any benefit. You can argue for proof of stake to eliminate the need for mining, but then you open the doors to centralization more immediately.
Oh yes, it is also feels so good that the richer have priority on transactions because they can pay exorbitant fees while you sometimes need to wait more than a month for a transaction to be confirmed.
I had to make a transaction to a private tracker and I don't want to go through it never again.
The only crypto that is kind if useful is Monero and that's because it is really private and anonymous. The problem with private and anonymous is that is ends up becoming a tool for crime.
I really like Talers approach with protecting the buyer not the seller. From a mass surveillance and advertising perspective they only see half the picture which makes the deep surveillance hard. Also it keeps businesses honest and supports rule of law.
I see this comment every now and then, and it always forgets the cost of the transaction, confirmation time
With Bitcoin lightning the confirmation time is under a second and you pay pennies in fees as you don't make the transaction on the main chain. Even main chain is like $1.50 for a 10 minute confirmation time which for many transactions like an international wire is still a great deal.
The energy cost is extraordinary, and the end user is taxed for the use of their own dollars.
The energy cost to maintain the base chain is <1% of global energy use, mostly from renewables at off-peak hours since miners have to chase the cheapest electricity. Remittance services and other funds transfer companies also use energy and human capital to move value around, it's not free. A single on-chain tx can open a lightning channel which can contain and secure trillions of transactions off-chain. Processing these transactions takes the energy equivalent of sending an e-mail. Users are "taxed for the use of their own dollars" in regular currency as well. Who pays that tax and the amount of that tax varies by context.
It can't scale
In the last two months alone, Nostr users (decentralized twitter clone like Mastodon) sent each other 3 million tips over Bitcoin lightning. It absolutely scales. And there is plenty of more room to grow.
Its value only increases because it manufactures its own scarcity.
Its value also comes from its use as a transactional network and from it's political neutrality geopolitically speaking. And from the known supply which nobody can manipulate. It's not purely scarcity.
naturally moves toward centralization since mining becomes too large an activity for the individual to reap any benefit
And yet mining is still distributed globally. Any person, company, or country with spare energy resources can buy an ASIC and mine. Mining pools have become more centralized, but a lot of work has been done on that in recent years and that trend is reversing as a result.
Bitcoin lightning is absolutely hilarious. Your solution to Bitcoins problems is - not using Bitcoin. Wow, galaxy brain move.
The energy cost to maintain the base chain is <1% of global energy use, mostly from renewables
Yeah, that's bullshit. First of all, 1% of energy use for a network that serves a few million transactions per day is really bad. A single 1kW node in Visa's datacenter churns through that in an hour.
Second, it's not renewables. It's everything they can get for cheap. And that's often enough coal, gas, oil. Also, they're driving up power demand as a whole, which means fossil energy is actually needed longer.
Bitcoin lightning is absolutely hilarious. Your solution to Bitcoins problems is - not using Bitcoin. Wow, galaxy brain move.
Bitcoin lightning is Bitcoin. It's a smart contract on the Bitcoin main chain. You move Bitcoin "into" lightning by sending it to that smart contract, you move it "out of" lightning by having that smart contract close. It inherits the security of Bitcoin main chain while getting the transaction speed of off-chain.
Agree to disagree about the rest. Energy use like carbon footprint is about "where you draw the box". Off-peak demand is the cheapest power available, and it tends to be renewable. That trend continues to escalate.
There is so much wrong with that firehose of nonsense you just said I don't have time to correct it all. So I'll focus on this one point:
Bitcoin may not be run by "a single government" but it is run by a small group of billionaires. You're a fool if you believe widespread adoption of it can improve things for regular people.
"under a second for pennies in fees"
LOL you either kidding yourself or had never transfer Bitcoin.
At a high demand time, it could take hours to complete a transaction (if it even went through at all) and with an outrageous fee up to dozens of dollars.
Bitcoin has never been known for time efficient nor competitive fees (except for maybe in the beginning when nobody uses it).
At a high demand time, it could take hours to complete a transaction (if it even went through at all) and with an outrageous fee up to dozens of dollars.
Bitcoin has never been known for time efficient nor competitive fees (except for maybe in the beginning when nobody uses it).
At least you admit people use it. Bitcoin lightning enables transactions in under a second for pennies in fees, it's been around for 5+ years. Your information is outdated. In the last two months, Nostr users alone (decentralized twitter clone like Mastodon) sent each other 2.6 million tips (individual transactions) over Bitcoin lightning. None of that requires an on-chain transaction, none of it required high fees. It works. It scales. It continues to improve.
Crypto won't scale
The computational requirements are high and its value fluctuates way to much. Also bitcoin isn't even private and you are basically shouting to the world every time you make a payment.
Crypto won’t scale
And yet every year, for 15 years, the transaction capacity has continued to increase. Networking protocols (TCP/IP, SMTP, etc) also didn't scale to "internet scale" in the first 15 years. They just kept adding new layers to the stack and optimizing it until it did. Just like Bitcoin added Lightning, Taproot, etc to improve scaling.
In the last two months, Nostr users alone (decentralized twitter clone like Mastodon) sent each other 2.6 million tips (individual transactions) over Bitcoin lightning. None of that requires an on-chain transaction, none of it required high fees. It works. It scales. It continues to improve. Lightning has capacity for trillions more transactions because capacity is not tied to chain space.
Also bitcoin isn’t even private and you are basically shouting to the world every time you make a payment.
Bitcoin is pseudonymous. If you make a wallet, nobody knows you own that wallet unless you tell them (or a third party like an exchange), but the balance and transactions on-chain are visible. There are ways to make your transactions more private, like coinjoin, you can have multiple addresses with multiple coins.
With lightning, transactions are opaque except to you and any nodes you route through, because lightning transactions don't go on chain. This also means nobody knows your current balance. If you make a transaction between two lightning nodes that share a channel, nobody knows that transaction was made outside of those two nodes. Privacy continues to improve, see BOLT 12 for the latest upgrades in this area.
But still no proof of stake.