My point is how great can it be if over a decade later the terrible system for mining is still dominant? The more people participating, the worse it gets. We just had texas power companies paying crypto bros to stop mining it’s gotten so bad - and we aren’t even at .01% adoption yet.
You’re chiming in in a way that ignores nuance and implied meaning. I feel like my intention has been pretty clear but if I need to spell it out so be it.
That’s more a question of being first on the scene and the financial impact if Bitcoin maximalists finally accepted that their blockchain is crap compared to other options, that’s what keeps Bitcoin at the top, not how good or bad it is compared to the tech’s potential…
And no your intention wasn’t very clear otherwise I wouldn’t have had to reply how I did previously.
I don’t know why you’re arguing about Bitcoin being PoW and how bad it is, in think I made it pretty clear that I agree with that…
As I mentioned in another comment, blockchains could replace the stock market and actually improve it. Some chains have transactions that are quick enough that it would be perfectly fine for it (except for automated trading systems, but fuck ATS), transactions would be publically visible instead of the mess that’s happening now, no more T+2 delay for the transactions to settle… But crypto is fighting tooth and nail not to be recognized as a security when it’s probably the only thing it could be good as… 🙄
Otherwise, as you said, blockchains are a solution in search of a problem to solve 🤷
It would improve the stock market by bringing transparency. Right now you’ve got transactions happening off market so as to not affect the price of stocks by creating a huge spike in demand and the only way you’ll know something happened is by paying to have access to level 2 data or by trying to cross reference the big moves that need to be declared by major investors.
Not all blockchains need to me anonymous either, one used for that purpose could be centralized with users needing to be registered with the authority that has control over the chain.
Well it’s been over a decade and Bitcoin is still PoW, as well as nearly 50% of the entire crypto market.
Ok… that doesn’t make what they said any less true?
My point is how great can it be if over a decade later the terrible system for mining is still dominant? The more people participating, the worse it gets. We just had texas power companies paying crypto bros to stop mining it’s gotten so bad - and we aren’t even at .01% adoption yet.
You’re chiming in in a way that ignores nuance and implied meaning. I feel like my intention has been pretty clear but if I need to spell it out so be it.
That’s more a question of being first on the scene and the financial impact if Bitcoin maximalists finally accepted that their blockchain is crap compared to other options, that’s what keeps Bitcoin at the top, not how good or bad it is compared to the tech’s potential…
And no your intention wasn’t very clear otherwise I wouldn’t have had to reply how I did previously.
deleted by creator
I don’t know why you’re arguing about Bitcoin being PoW and how bad it is, in think I made it pretty clear that I agree with that…
As I mentioned in another comment, blockchains could replace the stock market and actually improve it. Some chains have transactions that are quick enough that it would be perfectly fine for it (except for automated trading systems, but fuck ATS), transactions would be publically visible instead of the mess that’s happening now, no more T+2 delay for the transactions to settle… But crypto is fighting tooth and nail not to be recognized as a security when it’s probably the only thing it could be good as… 🙄
Otherwise, as you said, blockchains are a solution in search of a problem to solve 🤷
deleted by creator
Doesn’t need to be using PoW though.
It would improve the stock market by bringing transparency. Right now you’ve got transactions happening off market so as to not affect the price of stocks by creating a huge spike in demand and the only way you’ll know something happened is by paying to have access to level 2 data or by trying to cross reference the big moves that need to be declared by major investors.
Not all blockchains need to me anonymous either, one used for that purpose could be centralized with users needing to be registered with the authority that has control over the chain.
Bitcoin is more religion and cult than anything. Of course they think it’s great or at least able to hand wave criticisms.
And yeah, consensus is a hard problem to solve for. Many have taken the route of least resistance and implemented what is known to work.