Does Bitcoin Need To Scale

[Vishnu.Reang]

In the last 24 hours, there were 341 000 transactions with around 900 000 outputs.

At this pace, assuming everyone would simply hodl and not move a coin, it will take 20 years for everyone on earth to get a bitcoin, if everyone would then want to move that coin to a different wallet it will take another 20 years if they would want to send it to an exchange and sell another 20 years.
So, between getting your coins, sending them to storage and then selling them to cash out you will have an average of 40 years.
That's some extreme holding, isn't it?

Older users are going to hold their coins until their targets are achieved. Now these targets can vary from user to user. For some, it may be $100,000 per coin. For someone else, it may be $250,000 per coin. And for a different set of people, it can be $1,000,000 per coin. But that doesn't mean that the new users can't get the coins. They can purchased the coins if they want. But the prices have gone up by so much and the new investors may chose to buy very small amounts, say BTC0.01 or even BTC0.001.

[1715117523]

1715117523

[1715117523]

1715117523

[1715117523]

1715117523

[DooMAD]

and the new investors may chose to buy very small amounts, say BTC0.01 or even BTC0.001.

If Bitcoin is still popular in 50 years and we've moved on to pricing things in μBTC, I suspect people at the time will find it amusing that anyone thought BTC0.01 was a small amount.  It's possible the average person, whether they're hoarders or spenders, will likely have far fewer than that as scarcity increases.

[Betwrong]

I think that scalability must be oriented to satisfy all users. Regardless of particular needs or usage trends.

Okay, but what does that actually mean in practice?  I sincerely doubt there's a specific amount of scaling which can please everyone.  Someone is always going to moan that the balance is wrong somehow.  People talk about it like it's the simplest thing in the world, but it's actually a really complex issue.

Yes, it is. We have the "Blockchain Trilemma", according to Antonopoulos , when "we can't design for security, decentralization and scalability at the same time". If we want BTC to scale(and we definitely want that), we have to sacrifice some security or decentralization, or a bit of both. And although I personally believe that this problem will be solved by developers in the near future, I realize that it's surely not a simple one.

[deisik]

There may be a fundamental conflict between being a high volume day traded asset which can be utilized to purchase daily goods and services. And being an optimized HODL asset. Which in traditional finance is geared towards lower volatility, less volume and reduced access. A conflict which is seldom acknowledged

It is not acknowledged because it is irrelevant

These days no one is trying to buy a cup of coffee (a generic phrase or term for daily goods and services) with gold or other tangible assets. It is only with cryptocurrencies which are often considered and referred to as competitors to fiat money in this capacity but which can't actually play such a role that the conflict comes to surface. In other words, if they were not called currencies, and no one referred to them as such, there would be no conflict. It only exists in our mind as an instance of some vague cognitive dissonance

[beerlover]

There is a very limited amount of bitcoin to be mined, so miners are really working towards making a small amount of money each time and they are spending a ton of money to make that bitcoin, hence why they are trying to make their profit from the miner fee's which is causing all of this.

What needs to be done is not the transactions getting cheaper because that would basically be the result but not the solution, but to make sure that difficulty drops a ton and in order to drop difficulty this many people shouldn't be mining. If there was only a few places mining with few equipment, it would be actually faster, not because it is faster to calculate, but because there is no difficulty at all which means you constantly mine blocks back to back. In order to do that we need to make sure miners lose money and quit mostly.

[DooMAD]

In order to do that we need to make sure miners lose money and quit mostly.

No, the idea is that no one can "make sure" of anything.  The moment anyone had enough influence to do what you're suggesting, the whole thing would blow up in your face.  Allow the system to regulate itself.

Also, what you're suggesting sounds wrong anyway.  But the first point is the important one.

[stompix]

~

Older users are going to hold their coins until their targets are achieved.

If you look again at the numbers you'll realize that older people are going to hold their coin until death and that youngsters are going to sell them when they are sold.

Ok, let's use Bitcoin as an investment, what investment is that when only 200k poeple area able to buy and 200k are able to sell in a day? This assuming exchanges or banks will not have to combine their inputs when receiving coin and leave those coins like that till they send it to a buyer to minimize txs. Right now it's impossible for more than 1/3 of all Americans to receive a bitcoin transaction once a year.
Of course, this if we all deal with our own wallets and not with PoP (promise of payment) coins that are just a number on some website.

Bitcoin will have to scale for world usage, even if its investments or daily purchases, it's a must. How will this be done? This I'm starting to wonder myself.

There is a very limited amount of bitcoin to be mined, so miners are really working towards making a small amount of money each time and they are spending a ton of money to make that bitcoin, hence why they are trying to make their profit from the miner fee's which is causing all of this.

Miners can't set fees.

What needs to be done is not the transactions getting cheaper because that would basically be the result but not the solution, but to make sure that difficulty drops a ton and in order to drop difficulty this many people shouldn't be mining.

It's the other way around, difficulty drops when people stop mining, if you drop the difficulty now to 1 what you will achieve will simply be that all blocks will be mined in a few seconds till the difficulty adjustment when things will go back to normal.

If there was only a few places mining with few equipment, it would be actually faster, not because it is faster to calculate, but because there is no difficulty at all which means you constantly mine blocks back to back. In order to do that we need to make sure miners lose money and quit mostly.

Great idea, let's fuck everything!!!

[Ozero]

In the matter of scaling bitcoin, we first need to decide what we need it for. If we need bitcoin to be used as a means of payment, then we need to increase the number of transactions that can be processed with its participation in a second. Moreover, it should be noted that this is exactly how bitcoin was originally conceived, that is, as a means of payment.
 If we accept that it is enough to make only large transactions with Bitcoin, then it is not necessary to continue to scale it.
In my opinion, striving to increase the scaling of bitcoin is necessary, it must have a margin of safety in any case.