pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 12 replies \ @SimpleStacker 14 Nov \ parent \ on: On Bitcoin "Scaling" and the need for "Changes" bitcoin
Lightning may not be the only way to scale though. Hal Finney predicted that there'd be private bitcoin banks that would issue notes backed by Bitcoin. I think that may be quite likely too.
reply
at least it's still sound money.
You could provide people easy to use, cheap effective self custody and 'censorship resistance'. And I'm not sure that everyone would use it however it's still a big improvement.
I agree. I'm not sure that Bitcoin's fate is really for 'small daily' payments for candy bars cigarettes and chocolates. I mean maybe it is and I'm wrong!
But those things lose value very quickly... and Bitcoin doesn't.
It would make sense that Bitcoin is traded for other commodities, oil, gold, soybeans, property... even using the lightning network depending on the type of trade.
Trading Bitcoin for a candy bar to go and immediately eat it... unless you are out of everything else doesn't make as much sense honestly.
reply
Not only is it likely, it's definitely going to happen. But as I said the reply below, if we end up in a situation where you either own your own UTXO, or someone else does, and most people are in the "someone else" camp, I think we have a chance to the entire value bitcoin could bring to the world slip away.
reply
this is an interesting idea.
If the demand for Bitcoin and holding Bitcoin (specifically in self-custody where this becomes an issue anyway) is so great that 'we are running out of UTXOs' despite being able to willing to pay much much more for them....
then wow we have far more Bitcoin adoption than today.
reply
I don't necessarily agree with that.
There's still two huge differences between Bitcoin and fiat, even if most people hold Bitcoin in custodial accounts:
-
It's actually possible to self custody if you want to. With the current fiat system, this is almost impossible (or very inconvenient and unsafe) to do in large amounts.
-
The money supply is fixed and not controlled by governments.
These two features already bring much benefit, even if most people hold bitcoin custodially.
reply
Right. I'm not comparing bitcoin to fiat though, I am comparing bitcoin to our previous iteration of sound money, Gold.
Yes, it is possible to self custody, but will it be possible forever? Maybe for you and I, because we already own nice and shiny UTXOs.
Again, if most people only interact with bitcoin through custodians, we risk the slippage into the same situation. Sound Money held by few > Paper Promises > Paper Promises eroded > Paper Promises revoked.
reply
I agree with that. I suppose it will depend on how and when it becomes too expensive/difficult to self custody. I still would argue that Bitcoin offers some advantages over gold in this regard; less difficult to self custody, more secure, more portable. But only time will tell how an actual bitcoin based economy materializes.
reply
this is an interesting point.
perhaps one way to think of Bitcoin... is as a digital property. Property is 'finite'... that's why it's valuable.
Folks with the UTXOs (even small ones) are the property owners, property holders. And folks with lightning channels and their own utxos own that property but it's like a condo of sorts. The owner of the building has some say in the future and any given state of the property.
And the people using custodial services (which will be some people no doubt) are like renters. They don't own the property at all... they just rent property and us it for their own purposes while they can.
Is this a perfect system? No. But it gives people options and maybe that's the best we can hope for.
reply
I agree with that.
I think most folks would have an issue... only to the extent that rehypothication could and would occur. Banks and institutions 'saying' they had the Bitcoin, when they really didn't.
reply