It’s also centralized and just a bandaid over an issue that could have been solved if Bitcoin had stayed true to its original intention, i.e. digital cash, not a fake store of value.
Heck, Bitcoin itself had the majority of its hashrate coming from a dictatorship where the state needs to have a representative in all major companies… One move and the Chinese government had control over the network.
Nobody is forcing you to use the big nodes. Saying lightning is centralized because of that is like saying bitcoin is centralized because exchanges hold coins.
Yes, because it is even more wrong. One of the most mobile industries in the world that seeks cheap power concentrates where that cheap power is available. China ban bitcoin, miners moved away. Miners can always simply move somewhere else. That already happened and you don’t even know it.
China could have seized all mining equipment just by deciding to nationalize the industry instead of banning it, boom, 51%+ of the hashrate in the hands of the Chinese government. What were Bitcoin maximalists saying at the time? Fuck dick, as long as the price goes up, who cares about the tech behind it?
This is like saying Lemmy is centralized because lemmy.world exists. This senseless rambling may work elsewhere, but Lemmy has too many computer literate users for you to gain any traction here.
Alright, I can see now that you are just yelling out things you heard other people say without any idea what they mean. FYI, a bitcoin maximalist is someone who things there is no reason for any other crypto. That is absolutely not what this conversation is about. I don’t think bitcoin is the only useful coin, and I never said anything remotely similar to this. I’m sorry if you lost money gambling or something, but honestly I’m not surprised, clearly you are someone you gets overconfident with small amounts of information. That is possibly what you have to blame for whatever happened to you.
Oh sorry if I don’t keep up to date to the daily movement of Bitcoin… I mean, I wouldn’t have because it’s a store of value and the basic principle of a store of value is the ability to use it and be guaranteed to have what you put in or close to it…
I urge you to copy and paste this conversation into whatever is the best LLM you have access to and then ask it to point out any factual inaccuracies it can(of both you and everyone else in this thread). Then, go ahead and research any of the claims that it makes on your own. If you are curious to possibly learn something new today, then this is a great route to take. If you honesty believe what you are saying then this will be very enlightening. If you are actually just bitter about some bad choices you made and you actually don’t believe what you are saying then of course don’t waste any more of your time doing anything like this. Goodbye.
Sigh, you’re wrong again, bitcoin has the potential to be a store of value, it’s not one yet as it keeps going up long term until the market will have found a fair value.
You’re the only one who talked about split date and if we go by that argument, whenever there’s a hard fork the people who were there before will never be losing because they suddenly own both without having purchased one of them.
Show me where in the whitepaper does it mentions storing value, please.
No/low transaction fees and ease of transaction is the main point of cash vs barter, Bitcoin abandoned that, now you have to go through the trouble of using level 2 to have small fees and quick transactions, what’s the point of Bitcoin then?
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving astrusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. **The costof mediation increases transactioncosts, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions**, and there is a broader costin the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non- reversible services.
Right in the introduction to the whitepaper.
Maybe you should start with reading it so you would see where things went wrong.
It’s also centralized and just a bandaid over an issue that could have been solved if Bitcoin had stayed true to its original intention, i.e. digital cash, not a fake store of value.
Nothing about lightning is centralized, unless you think bitcoin itself is centralized.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/s3tvox/is_lightning_network_decentralized_why/
Great explanation by someone who isn’t a maximalists. Sorry but yes it is.
Haha. Fees are high and it’s impossible to open a channel because of that? That’s beyond stupid…
No, it’s centered around large nodes, that’s the point they’re making.
Over 50% of the network’s capacity in the hands of 5 entities?
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/vo86ki/over_half_of_all_lightning_network_capacity_is/
Shit’s decentralized as fuck yo!
Heck, Bitcoin itself had the majority of its hashrate coming from a dictatorship where the state needs to have a representative in all major companies… One move and the Chinese government had control over the network.
#decentralization
Nobody is forcing you to use the big nodes. Saying lightning is centralized because of that is like saying bitcoin is centralized because exchanges hold coins.
Did you ignore the second part of what I said? 🤔
Yes, because it is even more wrong. One of the most mobile industries in the world that seeks cheap power concentrates where that cheap power is available. China ban bitcoin, miners moved away. Miners can always simply move somewhere else. That already happened and you don’t even know it.
Ok, so you ignored what I said.
China could have seized all mining equipment just by deciding to nationalize the industry instead of banning it, boom, 51%+ of the hashrate in the hands of the Chinese government. What were Bitcoin maximalists saying at the time? Fuck dick, as long as the price goes up, who cares about the tech behind it?
This is like saying Lemmy is centralized because lemmy.world exists. This senseless rambling may work elsewhere, but Lemmy has too many computer literate users for you to gain any traction here.
Eh… Lemmy has too many computer literate users for Bitcoin maximalists and crypto to have taken a hold on the place, funny that!
Alright, I can see now that you are just yelling out things you heard other people say without any idea what they mean. FYI, a bitcoin maximalist is someone who things there is no reason for any other crypto. That is absolutely not what this conversation is about. I don’t think bitcoin is the only useful coin, and I never said anything remotely similar to this. I’m sorry if you lost money gambling or something, but honestly I’m not surprised, clearly you are someone you gets overconfident with small amounts of information. That is possibly what you have to blame for whatever happened to you.
♥️
This is absurd. Anyone who has the slightest idea of how it works knows that it is in no way centralized. It isn’t hard to learn how it works.
Everyone who believed this was true lost a lot of money betting on Bitcoin Cash.
Oh and show me people who bought Bitcoin in early 2021 that haven’t lost cash please.
Man, why is every one of your comments just wrong?
01.01.2021: 23902
today: 26143
Oh sorry if I don’t keep up to date to the daily movement of Bitcoin… I mean, I wouldn’t have because it’s a store of value and the basic principle of a store of value is the ability to use it and be guaranteed to have what you put in or close to it…
Don’t apologize, just use your time to learn instead of wasting it and everyone else’s by talking about things you don’t care to learn about first.
Oh I know how the shit works, I just don’t put blindfolds preventing me from seeing how flawed it is 🙂
I urge you to copy and paste this conversation into whatever is the best LLM you have access to and then ask it to point out any factual inaccuracies it can(of both you and everyone else in this thread). Then, go ahead and research any of the claims that it makes on your own. If you are curious to possibly learn something new today, then this is a great route to take. If you honesty believe what you are saying then this will be very enlightening. If you are actually just bitter about some bad choices you made and you actually don’t believe what you are saying then of course don’t waste any more of your time doing anything like this. Goodbye.
Bad choices I made? Like making hundreds of thousands of USD by exploiting the flaws in crypto? Yeah… Bad choices indeed…
Sigh, you’re wrong again, bitcoin has the potential to be a store of value, it’s not one yet as it keeps going up long term until the market will have found a fair value.
Well, if it’s a bad peer-to-peer electronic cash system and it’s not a store of value, what’s the point then? 🙂
Cherry picking, look at a log chart
So is saying that everyone who bought Bitcoin cash lost money considering today isn’t all time low.
It’s not as if I was here to defend Bitcoin cash, I’m here to point out that Bitcoin and lighting network is flawed though.
split date != ATH
The rhetoric you’re repeating is straight out of that scam. And you linked to their subreddit.
You’re the only one who talked about split date and if we go by that argument, whenever there’s a hard fork the people who were there before will never be losing because they suddenly own both without having purchased one of them.
At least Bitcoin cash stayed true to the goal of Bitcoin. A peer-to-peer electronic cash system.
That was also untrue. Electronic cash doesn’t imply no/low transaction fees. Basically everything they told you was a lie.
Show me where in the whitepaper does it mentions storing value, please.
No/low transaction fees and ease of transaction is the main point of cash vs barter, Bitcoin abandoned that, now you have to go through the trouble of using level 2 to have small fees and quick transactions, what’s the point of Bitcoin then?
No. I’ve had this exact argument enough times that it was a relief to finally bet on it.
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. **The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions**, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non- reversible services.Right in the introduction to the whitepaper.
Maybe you should start with reading it so you would see where things went wrong.
Lol I think you upset a bunch of BTC fans just now 🤣
I’m used to it 😁