Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 501 posts

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#311

Post by KaiserPro »

You are correct. One interesting point to note is the high disparity between prices on different exchanges.

COinbase shot through the roof, but other notable exchanges were sometimes $5k out for a number of hours. This proves that either people couldn't cross trade (i.e. buy cheap on one market and sell high on the other) or didn't know how to (which is suspect)

this could be because the transaction speed stalled trades, meaning that effectively each exchange became its own global market, either way, having large disparities between exchanges is problematic.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#313

Post by xorcist »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #310
xorcist wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't matter if you only use it for transactions. Step in, transact, step out.

Who is going to pay you for your Dogecoin if no one wants to hold them?

This is indeed the folly of only valuating a coin for its transactional properties.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#315

Post by chakalakasp »

HereBeBeasties wrote: post #268
ComputerGuru wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin is absolutely not a good store of value. A good store of value is a reliable store of value: one where you can place your assets and go back and get them at any later time. As a deflationary currency, bitcoin would be a hypothetically good store of value if a bitcoin actually had any intrinsic or even just de facto value. But it clearly doesn’t: it’s only the conversion to and from USD (and others) that has g…

Most asset classes look like that, though. Gold has some intrinsic value as a good conductor/reflector of heat. But it's not really so very much superior to aluminium or copper or whatever to make it worth what it is worth. It is expensive because it is scarce. That's it. Bitcoin is the same. (They are obviously very different in other ways, but you get the point.) Things don't need to have intrinsic value to be valu…

Gold isn't even in the same realm of volatility as BC, though. You put money in Gold and you're pretty sure if the world burns it's still worth something. You put money in BC at breakfast and you may be a pauper by lunch.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#316

Post by gruez »

taysic wrote: post #264

The rally is partly because it can’t scale and people are unable to get their bitcoin to an exchange to sell it. Instead it is stuck in the mempool... and there is an increasing amount of bitcoin that can’t be moved because fees surpass its value. For a bitcoin that has scaled see Bitcoin Cash.

>The rally is partly because it can’t scale and people are unable to get their bitcoin to an exchange to sell it.

that's demonstrably false. there's plenty room of you're willing to pay enough in transaction fees. if you don't want to pay $5 in transaction fees to cash out $5000, that's your problem. either that or you don't want to pay $5 to cash out $10, but in that case that has no appreciable impact on trading volume.

>For a bitcoin that has scaled see Bitcoin Cash.

if you mean bitcoin with block size limit lifted, then yes. but right now it's handling less transactions than bitcoin so it's not fair to say it has scaled.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#317

Post by xorcist »

FireBeyond wrote: post #290
xorcist wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somebody who feels compelled to sell their Bitcoins because the technology is not ready has probably not acquired any in the first place. Whatever technology replaces Bitcoin is likely something you can buy with Bitcoin. That's why people rush to buy something which obviously isn't "ready" (but maybe "good enough"). It's speculative, but do not think that people who invested a lot in this didn't think this through at…

> do not think that people who invested a lot in this didn't think this through at least as much as you have. Yeah, it's not like I can go on to /r/bitcoin and read multiple dedicated screeds along the lines of "I'm recommending my friends to invest savings in BTC for retirement". Whereupon someone replies "They should keep something in a Roth IRA for diversity", and the OP comments, "What's a Roth IRA?" Yes, there a…

Is the argument that you think Reddit users are representative of Bitcoin investors?

Most of the time it feels like these discussions are stuck rehashing old arguments in circles, but this was truly innovative. Thank you for not being predictable.

As for the argument itself, I think you are correct not to make any investment decisions based on what you described.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#318

Post by gruez »

theWatcher37 wrote: post #308
always_good wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's not accurate either. Miners sort transactions by fee and fill up a 1MB block. Use https://estimatefee.com/ . Not paying enough to win the fee auction is not the same as no transactions getting through at all. You seem a bit misinformed to be using the "Dude" prologue.

Incorrect. The fact is the network lacked the capacity to handle the requested number of transactions, and in turn auctioned off the tickets to the lifeboat to whoever paid the most. You’re arguing “nobody died in the titanic that didn’t pay enough”, when the problem is clearly there aren’t enough lifeboats.

why are you equating space on a global ledger with space on a lifeboat?

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#319

Post by etr-strike »

Beejeepa wrote: post #267
etr-strike wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lightning isn’t vaporware. Follow the project on github, they are very active. Better yet, watch the first lightning transaction happen on mainnet which occurred just last week: https://youtu.be/a73Gz3Tvx3k With regards to blocksize, the only reason it’s not widely embraced is because it’s known to directly impact propagation delay. One side couldn’t care less about centralization, the other side cares dearly. SegWit…

It's not only vaporware, it's uneconomical. That demo doesn't withdraw Bitcoin - it locks it up. Two transactions for every channel. Lightning Network is just another bank, a third party with fees.

Strange definition of vaporware you have, considering I just showed you lightning network operating across three different implementations of the protocol on the main bitcoin network.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#320

Post by chakalakasp »

seppin wrote: post #287
WA wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the store of value vision is built on the idea that it'll be possible to convert BTC into any other currency at any time. The other way around: If you can't buy most stuff with it (the case right now) and can't convert it into your everyday currency (maybe happens if the exchanges suddenly go down for some reason, even only temporarily), what's the value of Bitcoin?

> what's the value of Bitcoin? Selling it to someone else for more than you paid next week.

You're evading the question. If you can't at some point in the chain trade your fancy bitcoin beads for services or goods, then how is it any different than monopoly money? Right now it is useful because it can be easily traded for currencies that can purchase those things.
Post reply on HN