> On the matter of value: I suspect that if we find ourselves able to send a message back in time two years (when BTC was less than $1,000 USD) and report that the price is now over $3,700, that we'll find this message to be met with an understanding that this is, at least, a validation of the use of blockchain tech as a store of value
So just ignore everything in between?
Yah, sounds great...
> I suspect that if we describe the details of the lightning network in this message and report that transactions are radically faster and cheaper for retail-scale use, that we'll hear cheers about blockchain utility as a currency.
The lightning network is an overcomplicated joke, which requires on-chain transactions to seed, massive amounts of capital tied up into it, always-on participants etc. It also suffers from fundamental problems around routing, payment contention etc. A year on from its launch, it still has negligible uptake, and fails to really take any load off BTC.
Further, its very existence points to a massive failure in the underlying cryptocurrency as a payment network. I look at lightning and see two failures, not one success.
> Let's hear in our mind's voice about the next cohort of decentralized tech...
Very, very few people care about decentralised money, or decentralised tech as a whole. For most, the very nature of it represents a huge step backwards in usability and reliability compared to fast, lightweight, insured and reversible centralised systems.
> Let's celebrate all the adoption they report to us
There are virtually zero positive outcomes for blockchain tech, a decade on. Time to let it rot on the pile of might-have-been's
So just ignore everything in between? Yah, sounds great...
> I suspect that if we describe the details of the lightning network in this message and report that transactions are radically faster and cheaper for retail-scale use, that we'll hear cheers about blockchain utility as a currency.
The lightning network is an overcomplicated joke, which requires on-chain transactions to seed, massive amounts of capital tied up into it, always-on participants etc. It also suffers from fundamental problems around routing, payment contention etc. A year on from its launch, it still has negligible uptake, and fails to really take any load off BTC.
Further, its very existence points to a massive failure in the underlying cryptocurrency as a payment network. I look at lightning and see two failures, not one success.
> Let's hear in our mind's voice about the next cohort of decentralized tech...
Very, very few people care about decentralised money, or decentralised tech as a whole. For most, the very nature of it represents a huge step backwards in usability and reliability compared to fast, lightweight, insured and reversible centralised systems.
> Let's celebrate all the adoption they report to us
There are virtually zero positive outcomes for blockchain tech, a decade on. Time to let it rot on the pile of might-have-been's