Let me pose a question to all the advocates of hyper-Bitcoinization, particularly those who stand behind BTC. I welcome you to prove me wrong, to demonstrate just how much more you claim to know.
The reality is simple: BTC processes only 3 transactions per second, and that number is quite rigid.
The proponents of the Lightning Network tell us that this is the solution to scalability, yet empirical evidence shows it doesn't work.
It hasn't scaled, and the technical limitations are starkly clear. Despite claims to the contrary, Lightning does not hold up to scrutiny in practice, and no miracle technical solution is on the horizon to alter this fact.
So, given that BTC cannot handle a meaningful volume of transactions, how does one justify a vision where Bitcoin suddenly scales to billions of transactions per second?
Now, let’s consider the basic mathematics, which I will work through in the background. Let’s assume there are 8 billion people on this earth.
If we conservatively estimate that the average person makes between 3 and 5 transactions per day—whether buying food, paying bills, or simply engaging in everyday commerce—that leaves us with an astronomical figure for the number of transactions that must be processed globally each year.
The capacity required would far exceed the limitations of BTC’s current infrastructure.
Even if we put aside the practical constraints and imagine this so-called hyper-Bitcoinization world where every individual on the planet adopts BTC, the network couldn’t possibly keep pace with this level of demand.
It is not a matter of ideology; it’s a matter of mathematics and technology.
This leaves us with the following question: How do you, as a BTC proponent, explain this scenario, where your system cannot accommodate the necessary transaction volume? How do you reconcile this clear limitation with the vision of a world where Bitcoin replaces traditional financial systems and handles billions of transactions per second?
I invite you to engage with these realities, not with rhetoric or wishful thinking, but with substance.
I assert that the concept of hyper-Bitcoinization in its BTC form is untenable, not least because Bitcoin, in this sense, isn’t Bitcoin.
Rather, it’s a backwards vision where middlemen and centralised layers like Lightning are required to keep the system functional, which contradicts the very foundations on which Bitcoin was built.
So, prove me wrong—show me how BTC could handle this volume. Explain to me why this vision of hyper-Bitcoinization isn’t merely a fantasy, a fiction that is fundamentally incompatible with the technology as it stands today.
• • •
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 6, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1842835164558495844?t=nrisAg-IjV9LoSumSIOlAg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1123
The reality is simple: BTC processes only 3 transactions per second, and that number is quite rigid.
The proponents of the Lightning Network tell us that this is the solution to scalability, yet empirical evidence shows it doesn't work.
It hasn't scaled, and the technical limitations are starkly clear. Despite claims to the contrary, Lightning does not hold up to scrutiny in practice, and no miracle technical solution is on the horizon to alter this fact.
So, given that BTC cannot handle a meaningful volume of transactions, how does one justify a vision where Bitcoin suddenly scales to billions of transactions per second?
Now, let’s consider the basic mathematics, which I will work through in the background. Let’s assume there are 8 billion people on this earth.
If we conservatively estimate that the average person makes between 3 and 5 transactions per day—whether buying food, paying bills, or simply engaging in everyday commerce—that leaves us with an astronomical figure for the number of transactions that must be processed globally each year.
The capacity required would far exceed the limitations of BTC’s current infrastructure.
Even if we put aside the practical constraints and imagine this so-called hyper-Bitcoinization world where every individual on the planet adopts BTC, the network couldn’t possibly keep pace with this level of demand.
It is not a matter of ideology; it’s a matter of mathematics and technology.
This leaves us with the following question: How do you, as a BTC proponent, explain this scenario, where your system cannot accommodate the necessary transaction volume? How do you reconcile this clear limitation with the vision of a world where Bitcoin replaces traditional financial systems and handles billions of transactions per second?
I invite you to engage with these realities, not with rhetoric or wishful thinking, but with substance.
I assert that the concept of hyper-Bitcoinization in its BTC form is untenable, not least because Bitcoin, in this sense, isn’t Bitcoin.
Rather, it’s a backwards vision where middlemen and centralised layers like Lightning are required to keep the system functional, which contradicts the very foundations on which Bitcoin was built.
So, prove me wrong—show me how BTC could handle this volume. Explain to me why this vision of hyper-Bitcoinization isn’t merely a fantasy, a fiction that is fundamentally incompatible with the technology as it stands today.
• • •
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 6, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1842835164558495844?t=nrisAg-IjV9LoSumSIOlAg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1123
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment