Coin Center executive director Jerry Brito: > The Winklevoss ETF proposal was rejected because the SEC found that the significant markets for Bitcoin tend to be unregulated overseas markets that are potentially subject to price manipulation. But this creates a chicken and egg problem. How do we develop well-capitalized and regulated markets in the U.S. and Europe if financial innovators aren’t allowed to bring produc…
It's easy. If your product practical application was actually more important than it's speculation aspect then price manipulation would be greatly reduced. As bitcoin exists right now that's not the case of course. Bitcoin is now a mostly speculative asset since the amount of transactions you can do is extremely small compared to the market value of bitcoin at the moment.
1) A much better number to use is 4,500/10 minutes, because if the transactions aren't used in a prior second, they can still be used in the next.
2) One-way ratcheting timelocked channels (these payment channels work kind of like a giftcard) are ridiculously easy to implement -- basically just use this scriptPubKey: ``` OP_IF OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY OP_ELSE OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY OP_DROP OP_ENDIF OP_CHECKSIG ```(from https://21.co/learn/intro-to-micropayment-channels/) These only require two transactions total to send many transactions from Alice to Bob. Even as technologies like Lighting Network are further developed, which make these channels full duplex, institutions looking to get high volume trustless transactions through should have very little challenge adopting simpler channels now.
3) The number of transactions is completely separate from the amounts that can be transacted. Large value transactions move through bitcoin as easily as small, so even if the number of transactions were bottle-necked, this is still very useful for settling larger amounts with finality.