My (pessimistic) theory on the future of crypto

[bubbler63]

I'm probably going to get a lot of sh*t for this, but I just wanted to put my thoughts out there and get your feedback. Here's what I think will happen in the future (3-5 years).

- Alt-coins will die off. I don't see a need at the moment and in the future for these types of coins. As sad as it sounds, your local government and companies have you deep within their grasp when it comes to transacting for day-to-day usage. Venmo, Square Cash, FB Messenger, even iMessage are way better at sending your friends a few dollars (for free!). Why do I need to send my friends a Litecoin or whatever coin backed by random devs who are working on this in their spare time. Companies have leaders and hundreds and thousands of programmers to make sure your money (localized) transferring experience is a good and cost-effective one. The blockchain doesn't add much here.

- Decentralized apps will die off. I'm a little bit more unsure about this but it simply doesn't scale. Ask experts out there and they'll tell you that a centralized app can do the job better, if not the same, as a decentralized one. Your bank's web portal is a "centralized app" and it works fine. Amazon is "centralized" and it works fine. Etc, etc.

- Bitcoin will be the only thing left standing. Why? Because bitcoin is bitcoin. It was the first and it's the most recognized and there is already tons of momentum. Yes other cryptos will rise but people will always go back to Bitcoin. People will say that the Bitcoin network is slow and expensive to send money. Well, the way I see it is that Bitcoin will simply by used for people in the middle to upper class with lots of money to store it. It will be used to send money internationally. It will be used to perhaps buy a house, and what not. It will NOT be used for day-to-day transactions, which is perfectly fine. Bitcoin will be like Gold, except digital. Transferring BTC might be slow and might be $20 or $100, but that's OK when you're transferring $20,000+ internationally or make a large purchase.

Would love to get some feedback. This is just an opinion... please don't bash me. I'm open to learning what other cryptos will have to offer in the future. But please try to debate against for yourself for a moment. Are YOU having issues with how things are now? Can the problem really ONLY be solved by blockchain technology?

Thanks for reading!

[1714663409]

1714663409

[1714663409]

1714663409

[1714663409]

1714663409

[1714663409]

1714663409

[1714663409]

1714663409

[habaratbu]

I'm probably going to get a lot of sh*t for this, but I just wanted to put my thoughts out there and get your feedback. Here's what I think will happen in the future (3-5 years).

- Alt-coins will die off. I don't see a need at the moment and in the future for these types of coins. As sad as it sounds, your local government and companies have you deep within their grasp when it comes to transacting for day-to-day usage. Venmo, Square Cash, FB Messenger, even iMessage are way better at sending your friends a few dollars (for free!). Why do I need to send my friends a Litecoin or whatever coin backed by random devs who are working on this in their spare time. Companies have leaders and hundreds and thousands of programmers to make sure your money (localized) transferring experience is a good and cost-effective one. The blockchain doesn't add much here.

- Decentralized apps will die off. I'm a little bit more unsure about this but it simply doesn't scale. Ask experts out there and they'll tell you that a centralized app can do the job better, if not the same, as a decentralized one. Your bank's web portal is a "centralized app" and it works fine. Amazon is "centralized" and it works fine. Etc, etc.

- Bitcoin will be the only thing left standing. Why? Because bitcoin is bitcoin. It was the first and it's the most recognized and there is already tons of momentum. Yes other cryptos will rise but people will always go back to Bitcoin. People will say that the Bitcoin network is slow and expensive to send money. Well, the way I see it is that Bitcoin will simply by used for people in the middle to upper class with lots of money to store it. It will be used to send money internationally. It will be used to perhaps buy a house, and what not. It will NOT be used for day-to-day transactions, which is perfectly fine. Bitcoin will be like Gold, except digital. Transferring BTC might be slow and might be $20 or $100, but that's OK when you're transferring $20,000+ internationally or make a large purchase.

Would love to get some feedback. This is just an opinion... please don't bash me. I'm open to learning what other cryptos will have to offer in the future. But please try to debate against for yourself for a moment. Are YOU having issues with how things are now? Can the problem really ONLY be solved by blockchain technology?

Thanks for reading!

I agree with your prediction,BTC pumps will result to bleeding alts,while the BTC price keeps going up the alts wont have any value because alts are measured in sats not usd.

[generalizethis]

Bitcoin lost the last man standing argument when it decided to go mainstream and not pursue privacy. There was a failure to acknowledge that blockchains are best suited for censorship resistant tx--it may be (somewhat) decentralized, but traceability means that tx can be monitored and refused or held until exchanges get approval from an authority. There are far better solutions for normal tx (scale, speed) and also for censorship resistant tx, Bitcoin is poor at both. You can say lightening network will fix these issues, but that is a ways off and second layer solutions  are less efficient than layer one solutions--it's just a hoop to jump through to get where you want to go.

[bubbler63]

Bitcoin lost the last man standing argument when it decided to go mainstream and not pursue privacy. There was a failure to acknowledge that blockchains are best suited for censorship resistant tx--it may be (somewhat) decentralized, but traceability means that tx can be monitored and refused or held until exchanges get approval from an authority. There are far better solutions for normal tx (scale, speed) and also for censorship resistant tx, Bitcoin is poor at both. You can say lightening network will fix these issues, but that is a ways off and second layer solutions  are less efficient than layer one solutions--it's just a hoop to jump through to get where you want to go.

Good point on the privacy factor. But regarding scale and speed, I would say that we there isn't a need for scale and speed right now or in the future. I don't really care to pay for my coffee with Bitcoin. It's as if there was a need for lamborghini or rolls royce to figure out how to make their cars 100,000x faster. It just wouldn't happen. Not everyone can afford lambos and rolls--only rich people buy them and the rate and the price is just fine for them. As with Bitcoin, it'll be for people with lots of money doing business internationally and needing a medium to transfer the funds. At that point, I wonder if privacy is even necessary or warranted because if you're transfer large amounts of money, it's a bad idea to do it for illegal reasons (hence the need for privacy).

[generalizethis]

Bitcoin lost the last man standing argument when it decided to go mainstream and not pursue privacy. There was a failure to acknowledge that blockchains are best suited for censorship resistant tx--it may be (somewhat) decentralized, but traceability means that tx can be monitored and refused or held until exchanges get approval from an authority. There are far better solutions for normal tx (scale, speed) and also for censorship resistant tx, Bitcoin is poor at both. You can say lightening network will fix these issues, but that is a ways off and second layer solutions  are less efficient than layer one solutions--it's just a hoop to jump through to get where you want to go.

Good point on the privacy factor. But regarding scale and speed, I would say that we there isn't a need for scale and speed right now or in the future. I don't really care to pay for my coffee with Bitcoin. It's as if there was a need for lamborghini or rolls royce to figure out how to make their cars 100,000x faster. It just wouldn't happen. Not everyone can afford lambos and rolls--only rich people buy them and the rate and the price is just fine for them. As with Bitcoin, it'll be for people with lots of money doing business internationally and needing a medium to transfer the funds. At that point, I wonder if privacy is even necessary or warranted because if you're transfer large amounts of money, it's a bad idea to do it for illegal reasons (hence the need for privacy).

Corporations, governments, istituional investors, militaries, etc, do not want their finances being examined by anyone, domestic or foreign. As far as private citizens, would you want your net worth being analyzed by criminals or the media or even a family member who has a lot of ideas to pitch, but can't ever bankroll them himself--

You can even ask Andreas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO2UOhGEC_A&feature=youtu.be&t=1070

[kevoh]

I don't agree with bitcoin being the only thing left standing, you might be right on the part where it will simply be used by the middle to upper class with lots of money for larger transaction but I believe they are some altcoins that will still remain alongside Bitcoin. Remember the lower class still needs to be catered for.

Ethereum, Minero, Litecoin, Ripple are a huge candidates to remain alongside bitcoin.

[Snorren]

Alts aren't about sending money or using some obscure token. It's about smart contracts and the new internet.

In 15 years no one will their own a playstation, cell phone or computer as we know it. It'll only be a screen, a battery and an internet connection. The devices will just stream virtual computer (like Golem), paid with ethereum. Creating cheap, environmentally friendly devices with extremely long battery life. Neo will control the smart economy, automated uber taxis will make money on their own.

For example; If I would like to create a large betting site, i can pretty much get a wordpress site and smart contracts and I'm ready to go. If i do that without the blockchain i need a million dollar investment in hardware/system and legal fees.

Yes crypto will peak and "crash" in perhaps 1-2 years. And you can be sure you'll find me stacking up on BTC at that time.
And like the internet bubble in 2000 it will take at least 10 years from the crash until the visions match up with reality, but the time will without doubt come.

[trickyriky]

If you start to regulate the ICO, then there will be less useless coins and only those who have a real prospect to develop and make profit to their owners will remain. Bitcoin is the very first coin, but others are also necessary.

[btcbonanza]

I dont think cryptocurrencies will die. What actually dies? A commodity/action/person/anything which has stopped developing dies after some period of stagnation. But cryptocurrencies are ever-developing. Hundreds of ICOs launched last year, so this year and hundreds are coming in next years. Not all of them are shitty, some aiming on development of existing tech too (have you noticed Jibrel Network).
So according to me, present cryptocurrencies won't die, rather they will be evolved and taken over by superior cryptos of future.

[m.vina]

While I agree with most of your points, there are some I would like to challenge as well.

1. This is exactly the reason why we should switch to cryptocurrencies. Why should we allow the other people or the government to poke into your business. Privacy and freedom is a great reason behind crypto.

2. Decentralized can be built to scale just like any other application.

3. Most altcoins will die, but there will be some (like Ethereum) that will survive healthy competition is always needed and because people want options.

[ZaoXhou]

If this would happen, the crypto scene would get a lot smaller.
Bitcoin's features and development will be decided by the wrong people.And the freedom that comes with bitcoin will disappear..thus we need alts.