RE: Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash vs Bitcoin Gold vs Bitcoin Diamond vs Bitcoin Private (English/Turkish)
One of the main commercial arguments in favor of bitcoin is undoubtedly low transaction costs and consumer properties. Bitcoin offers lower fees compared to many interbank payment online systems and systems such as Western Union. Simplicity in handling is a key factor for the diffusion of technology. According to one view, the slow spread of bitcoin can lead to the fact that it will lose in the fight against alternative payment solutions, whether it is traditional centralized systems or alternative distributed tokens such as Ethereum.
Although bitcoin is cheaper and perhaps easier to handle than some centralized alternatives, in many cases, centralized alternatives are faster and cheaper than bitcoin. For example, in many countries of Western Europe, retail transfers between banks are free and instant. In China, Alibaba and Tencent offer fast, simple and free payment solutions. Tencent is capable of processing up to 200,000 transactions per second, which is many times greater than that of bitcoin.
Some consider these factors as a risk for bitcoin, others as a battle in which bitcoin was initially doomed to failure. Nevertheless, while fast and free payments are not available to the entire population of the planet, bitcoin can be a viable alternative. But should we start from the fact that suppliers of traditional payment solutions will ever refuse to provide free and fast services?
Another thing that has to be taken in mind is that for Bitcoin or any other crypto to be mass adopted, the use of hardware has to be mass adopted as well. As long there are people without internet, smartphones or even regular phones that can receive sms, fiat will be used. I agree that the next 5 year will be crucial for the development of crypto and the new market it has developed.
Now instead of having "... 164 official national currencies circulating around the world. Although the number of the independent countries is 197 plus about five dozen of dependent territories. The matter is, that some of them don't have their own money and officially use the foreign currency."[https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/world-currencies.html] now we have to deal with a lot more, that are seen as a way of investment more than a transfer of value; my point here is that many "smart money" is moving from the regulated stock exchanges to the "crypto world" and that transfer of fiat regulated money can also bring a mayhem in the traditional money system.
Just to finish before I get into other topics LOL, BTC is only the tip of the iceberg of financial revolution in which people will want to have the control of their money and assets 24/7.
Well said sir
the fact remains that they are centralized solutions, they are trusted third parties that have the potential to fail and specifically with banks they use your money to create air, fund wars, make themselves richer and eventually create a bigger gap between rich and poor. Banks every now and again fail, so money transfers are often not finite another downside of the traditional system.
So in terms of this, I see the technology that figured out a way to get rid of a trusted party and maintain a ledger in decentralised fashion, as something banks will longterm struggle to compete with unless the goverments worldwide shut it down. Bitcoin isn't fast enough and 3ven if the Lightning Network ends up offering a second layer solution, there will be better crypto assets out in the future either through sharding or other solutions, that offer fast transactions 1 billion tx per sec + and still be decentralised.
Very few people trust banks, hate bankers, yet people still have their eyes closed for the above tech asbit is difficult to understand and smells of Ponzi to many.
I hope one day people understand that the real ponzi or con is our current financial system.
Well said sir
Well said sir