NewAccount on Nostr: 1. That is why the Lightning Network was invented. True, as more people use Bitcoin, ...
1. That is why the Lightning Network was invented. True, as more people use Bitcoin, the blockchain will become more expensive for the average Bitcoiner to use, but the blockchain isn't practical for day-to-day transactions anyway, and it prioritizes security of the network over transaction speed. Also, there are workarounds along with Lightning that aim to offload transaction fees (such as batching transactions, Taproot, Segwit, etc.)
2 and 4: There are two things to keep in mind with the Bitcoin network: 1) the ability to easily run a full node determines how decentralized the network is, since nodes. decide. the rules. 2) Because Bitcoin's mining relies on hardware of which their sole purpose is to mine Bitcoin (ASIC computers), then the manufacturers of this hardware are economically disincentivized to do anything that would harm the security of the network.
3. But it does matter, in the winner-take-all game of money, if more and more people adopt your currency or not. Monero might have better base-layer privacy, but what would it mean if adoption stagnates or decreases, and Monero loses its purchasing power over time?
Also to mention, Monero as a whole comes with critical tradeoffs that Bitcoin doesn't suffer from; such as:
1. Less network security due to ASIC resistance, which makes it easier to mine and also attack Monero
2. More centralization risk due to bigger block sizes, which would make running a full node (which is also crucial for network security and setting the rules of the network) more expensive for the average user.
3. Less adoption, networking effects, first-mover advantage, familiarity, and liquidity
4. Again, because Bitcoin mining relies on expensive hardware that is exclusively designed to have one function, and only one function (ASIC computers that can ONLY mine Bitcoin), and Bitcoin mining is extremely difficult due to its hashrate; the manufactureres of this hardware, the users of it, and even governments that may seize it are always financially DISINCENTIVIZED from doing anything that would undermine the security of the network, such as peforming a 51% attack.
2 and 4: There are two things to keep in mind with the Bitcoin network: 1) the ability to easily run a full node determines how decentralized the network is, since nodes. decide. the rules. 2) Because Bitcoin's mining relies on hardware of which their sole purpose is to mine Bitcoin (ASIC computers), then the manufacturers of this hardware are economically disincentivized to do anything that would harm the security of the network.
3. But it does matter, in the winner-take-all game of money, if more and more people adopt your currency or not. Monero might have better base-layer privacy, but what would it mean if adoption stagnates or decreases, and Monero loses its purchasing power over time?
Also to mention, Monero as a whole comes with critical tradeoffs that Bitcoin doesn't suffer from; such as:
1. Less network security due to ASIC resistance, which makes it easier to mine and also attack Monero
2. More centralization risk due to bigger block sizes, which would make running a full node (which is also crucial for network security and setting the rules of the network) more expensive for the average user.
3. Less adoption, networking effects, first-mover advantage, familiarity, and liquidity
4. Again, because Bitcoin mining relies on expensive hardware that is exclusively designed to have one function, and only one function (ASIC computers that can ONLY mine Bitcoin), and Bitcoin mining is extremely difficult due to its hashrate; the manufactureres of this hardware, the users of it, and even governments that may seize it are always financially DISINCENTIVIZED from doing anything that would undermine the security of the network, such as peforming a 51% attack.