The Days of Bitcoin Mining Are Nearly over (2019)

"The problem is that transaction fees easily become a significant part of the total cost to the end user meaning that Bitcoin becomes unattractive for all but large purchases."

This is NOT a quality of Bitcoin, only the Bitcoin implementation called "Core". This "problem" was solved by Satoshi himself and has been activated in the chain, Bitcoin Cash.

The whole argument in this article is baseless and assumes that for some reason the "Core" implementation is the only one possible.

It also assumes there is no incentive/demand for "Layer 2" solutions, like Liquid, Lightning Network, Bisq. There's lots of room for experimentation, but I'm very opposed to "big blocks" (as the above poster has mentioned). If you'd like to hear why, and in fact should maybe be even smaller, I suggest this brief explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqNEQS80-h4

There's always someone ready to say that 2KB/s is too much for servers. There is never a real explanation or evidence of course, just vague hand waving, predictions about the future, assertions they hope people won't think about or validate, etc.

The person in this video was adamant that the sun revolves around the earth (yes really) possibly stemming from radical religious beliefs that most reasonable people would take as a sign of mental illness. Don't forget that he is essentially arguing that something that already works won't work.

I can't believe anyone would believe that cryptocurrency blocks can't go over 1 MB every 10 minutes when plenty already have. Most users don't even sync with the main chain even though they can. The whole thing is mind melting.

Why keep doing this? The second layer stuff is a solution in search of a problem and everyone behind it keeps trying to convince everyone there is a problem.

Crashing back to where it was in 2019?

This article is bad. 1. The cost the mine a resource trends towards the value of the resource. As Bitcoin value goes up and down, hash rate tracks it going up and down. Increases in efficiency allow you to hash more at lower cost. However this is a red herring, as waste is required for POW, because: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory

Thus, money wasted on hardware and electricity tracks Bitcoin price, and hash rate itself is a function of efficiency times energy waste while staying under BTC price profitability cap.

2. Most blockchains are empty, and they all work "decently." As decently as the worlds most expensive and slowest databases can be. What blockchains need is not higher TPS or lower fees, but more users. They say the demand for unlimited free storage is infinite, so a fee market must always exist, bounded by storage costs (and duplication across many nodes.)

By the way, when I say most blockchains are empty, the amount of fee revenue generated per chain per day is PITIFUL and falls of amazingly fast. https://coinmetrics.io/charts/#assets=btc,bch_roll=7_left=Fe... says: BTC $342,000 in fees per day. ETH $95,000 in fees per day. BCH $130 in fees a day

3. 1000tps is already in production by zkrollups and optimistic rollups on ETH. See it in production at loopring.io. There's more BTC wrapped on ETH than in lightning on BTC.

Disclaimer: I founded the #76 highest marketcap cryptocurrency, and one of its features is not paying miners block rewards, only fees.

P.S. Scaling is cured enough for now using zkrollups. The market for slow, expensive databases should always be restricted to things that REQUIRE censorship resistance, and most things do not.