You don't need to have a numeric way to measure two things against each other to say one is greater than the other. You don't need quantitative data to back every statement you make in your life. I can say that Mozart was more talented at writing and performing music than Kirk Cousins is at playing quarterback in the NFL and there is no way to measure this, but everyone would agree that it is true. It's not an unreasonable statement to make at all.
But what you said is more in line with:
You- Kirk Cousins is not worth $20m/year contract!
Me- How much do you think he's worth then?
You- Hurr durr what kind of question is that? You can't put a figure on skills!
Me- wtf??
This is completely wrong. You didn't understand the analogy. You omitted Mozart entirely.
You really don't believe me? Transactions were costing insane amounts of money in November/December last year and taking weeks to process. They were stuck sitting in mem pools forever. Here is the ID, although I don't think there is any way you can see when I submitted it: 7345a9bc63c1532082414d1849ff908a18f4dbdc0859959197fa022c66a2dd3e
Yes you can. Your tx took less than 5 days, not 8. You paid $20.43 worth of fees (at that time) not $40. You exaggerated by a factor of x3.2. With $40 fee, standard sized tx would likely get included in the next block (even during peak congestion time), that's why I called you out on that.
If what you are saying is true then it doesn't even matter anyway. You're really grasping at straws here. $20.43 and 5 days is still insanely far beyond anything reasonable. Cue you asking for a specific number for time and fee that is reasonable... I'll answer you now - faster than the time I have to wait for a credit card to process at a store, and a lower fee than the net profit the CC companies make per transaction.
I never claimed they were settled, that is irrelevant. It just has to be confirmed for a credit card transaction... you can't just accept that a bitcoin transaction will be all set when it enters the mem pool... in the case of bitcoin, you NEED to wait for it to settle.
You could before RBF was implemented and blocks weren't full. The risk was there but it was far lower than the risk of fraudulent credit card chargeback (btw, merchant can consider cc payment fully settled when chargeback time limit expires), so perfectly fine for small/mid transactions. You can still do that with BCH, you have other coins with near-instant confirmations (or instant non-blockchain coins) and you have other solutions like LN in a making. Wait, why am I feeling like I'm repeating myself...
Wrong, risk of fraudulent bitcoin transactions is higher. Both credit cards and bitcoin come with the risk of someone stealing your credentials and pretending to be you u- the difference being that you will most likely be reimbursed by the credit card company in their case. Plus, they are getting better and better at automatically detecting fraud. PLUS, people can submit fraudulent bitcoin transactions without your info... it will just get rejected. It will take longer for it to be rejected than for a credit card transaction to be successfully submitted.
Also in regards to your RBF point... none of the major bitcoin wallets implement RBF and the majority of people don't know what it is.
If you build a payment system on top of bitcoin then you are taking something decentralized and improving it by centralizing it. Coinbase can do instant transfers because they control all of the bitcoin and know all of their private keys are valid. You can't transfer into or out of Coinbase instantly. If you want all bitcoin payments to be controlled by a sytem like Coinbase then why even use bitcoin at all? What is the benefit of that over credit cards?
There is always a tradeoff between decentralization/trustlessness and speed/scalability. Nobody is SOLVING the pitfalls of crypto without sacrificing decentralization and trustlessness.
Relying on 3rd parties on top of blockchain is hypothetical dark scenario when everything else fails. Even then you have benefit of having control over majority of your funds and only depositing smaller amounts to the 3rd parties. Having to trust someone with your $200 is not the same as having to trust someone with all your money, all the time, isn't it?
I'm sure even you put at least a tiny value in having an option in life (to use crypto if you ever feel like it), it's better than not having such option.
The point is that a "third party" blockchain or centralized, non-trustless blockchain is pointless because it doesn't bring the benefit of decentralization and it far underperforms its direct competitor - a traditional database.
The difference between bitcoin and mcdonalds is that mcdonalds has a book value. They have stores, inventory, etc. They also have sales, and earnings... income... bitcoin has none of that. It has no intrinsic value, which is why it cannot exist in this limbo state you described forever.
Bitcoins also have book value. You didn't address the point. Can you explain, precisely at what tx/sec capacity rate BTC moves from being completely worthless to being worth something. What's the magic number?
Bitcoin does not have a book value. To answer your question, see my response to your other quote. It has to be better than credit cards and banks to be worth anything.
No, you are saying that Swift and others investing in private non-trustless blockchains means they have value.
It's a strong indicator that they find the technology useful. I don't expect Swift is spending shitloads on blockchain solutions just to bump their stock price, because they are a Society and don't even have a listed stock + probably they would be the first to debunk the blockchain tech if it was indeed useless (as it's a direct competition to their service). Just as I find it hard to believe that Blockstream would manage to sell their private blockchain solutions to any business if it was indeed inferior to the existing tech etc.
Yes, I find it more credible than word of an anonymous forum "expert", with no history, saying "they're all wrong/they're a fraud".
Second of all, I don't see any real connection between BTC's worth and usefulness of private chains, so couldn't care less.
They could be pushing up the value of their shares in the private market. Investors exchange shares of private companies all the time. Either way, regardless of whether or not that is the reason, this is not an indicator that private blockchains are useful any more than Jamie Dimon's comments on bitcoin are an indicator that it is a fraud.
Creating a new crypto and automatically assigning it value is exactly what is happening every day! Look at all the IPOs everywhere. This is literally what bitcoin is... creating value out of nothing. If it worked for bitcoin, eth, bch, ltc, iota, xrp, doge, etc... why would we think this will stop?
So if I create my own premined shitcoin and assign its value at $1m/coin, I'd be instantly the richest man in the world? Or, could it be, I actually need someone to buy from me at that price?
What you are saying here is that the work in creating a crypto is convincing other people to give it value. The only reason they would give it value is if they think that other people will give it a higher value. I don't consider crypto to be a Ponzi Scheme but I can see why a lot of people do.
I'm not saying it's easy to go out and create a coin and get value for it, but it is being done consistently.
USD has intrinsic value because every person and organization in the US is required by law to accept it as payment for debt. It is legally guaranteed value by the US government. I would argue that this is intrinsic value. This differs from bitcoin, which nobody is required to accept anywhere.
What's guaranteed is USD acceptance, not its value. Zimbabwean Dollars were also a legal tender and how did that work in terms of retaining the value? There's no intrinsic value in USD. What's funny, it can get worse than that, in some cases being legal tender can prevent you from extracting intrinsic value from physical notes/coins, i.e. scrap metal value of 1 cent coin exceeds 1 cent, but scrapping/destroying official money is a criminal offence.
The fact that people NEED USD to pay their taxes and make every day purchases gives it value. If I have a dollar, I know with certainty that it won't be worthless tomorrow because the government requires citizens to use it to pay their taxes and debts... not Zimbabwean dollars, US Dollars. Yes, the value will fluctuate, but it will still have some value. I'm not saying USD is a good investment - it's definitely not.
