Problem with mass adoption of Bitcoin

[Cyber_Alien]

I was chatting about Bitcoin's impact and effects with a few friends today. My friends discuss the impact that Bitcoin whales are having on the adoption of Bitcoin. In the coming years, according to Bitcoin experts, adoption will increase. He claimed that 3.7 million coins are lost, with the remaining coins being held on chains by early adopters.

He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.

However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.

I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?


Happy Christmas 🎄🎄

[1714309020]

1714309020

[1714309020]

1714309020

[Coin_trader]

Proper distribution of holdings will only happen when real adoption occurs. There’s no need to limit the holdings of each user since it will just suppress the freedom of holding Bitcoin. Those whale holders deserves to have that profit because they actually risk big on something they don’t guarantee profit during there early investment.

The real problem of Bitcoin mass adoption are the government and bankers that keeps slowing down Bitcoin growth through the laws that will regulate Bitcoin. Also the shit CEX that keeps doing shady trades to manipulate the Bitcoin price to pump and dump scheme.

[kryptqnick]

It's not known whether there truly is a small group of people that is able and actively engages in triggering major Bitcoin price shifts. I don't see enough evidence if it, and thus I don't believe it. Distribution is definitely uneven, but that's the way with any kind of wealth in the world, so it's a global challenge. Limiting the amount per person would be dystopian, as it limits the freedom of people to buy however much they want and requires linking all wallets to personal IDs to ensure  one person doesn't simply have several wallets to avoid the limit. I think that a way toward more equal distribution of  wealth, including Bitcoin, shouldn't be as restrictive.

[m2017]

I was chatting about Bitcoin's impact and effects with a few friends today. My friends discuss the impact that Bitcoin whales are having on the adoption of Bitcoin. In the coming years, according to Bitcoin experts, adoption will increase. He claimed that 3.7 million coins are lost, with the remaining coins being held on chains by early adopters.

He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.

However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.

I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?


Happy Christmas 🎄🎄

Well, how do you propose to change the current and existing system? Take bitcoins from whales and distribute to all other people? I know the sad experience of one country in which they decided to distribute material wealth in approximately the same way, and as a result, nothing good came of it.

It seems to me that the market itself will resolve and adjust this imbalance over time. In this system, and so everyone can have bitcoin or part of it. Especially when the price has dropped so low. So you seem to be worrying too much. Moreover, nothing can be changed, thanks to decentralization, and there is no special body capable of redistributing bitcoin in any other way.

[Upgrade00]

In the coming years, according to Bitcoin experts, adoption will increase. He claimed that 3.7 million coins are lost, with the remaining coins being held on chains by early adopters.

There are no Bitcoin experts and If you're going to give a report, you should include the source of that report.
Firstly, there are no groups of early adopters who own the bulk of bitcoins, the distribution of holders is spread among a wide range of adopters from early to late.
Also, the number of potentially lost bitcoins are unknown, everyone can only make conjectures to the amount.

Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.

A supply shock is defined by many as "an unexpected event that changes the supply of a product or commodity". This cannot apply to Bitcoin as the amount of bitcoins in circulation and that would ever be in existence is public and cannot change.

However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.

I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?

• That's a terrible idea for a decentralized currency. Limiting the amount that people can hold is creating a problem of itself, and would need the entire system to change to achieve that. Why fix something that isn't broken?

• I think we are already on the way to achieving wide spread adoption.

[maikrothaman]

I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?

Whales, in my opinion, are not the primary deterrent to widespread adoption of bitcoin. I believe that cash is much more user-friendly and practical than bitcoin. Alternatively, once the cash is gone, cryptocurrencies like bitcoin (possibly privacy coins) will take its place.

[noorman0]

Lack of awareness and knowledge gaps across all levels of society hinder adoption. Admittedly, I think bitcoin experienced a slowdown in popularity at first. Bitcoin has to undergo a natural evolution into a high volatility asset first to get a lot of attention.
The biggest barrier to adoption right now is (regulation aside), not a few people who currently feel like they've missed the train when BTC hit ATH, and some FUD when the market is sick.

[Vaskiy]

I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?

Whales, in my opinion, are not the primary deterrent to widespread adoption of bitcoin. I believe that cash is much more user-friendly and practical than bitcoin. Alternatively, once the cash is gone, cryptocurrencies like bitcoin (possibly privacy coins) will take its place.

Cash through its years and years of history have secured the position to be the user-friendly one and getting used even when more and more alternate gateways have got opened in the form of digital payments and cryptocurrencies. Cash to get out of usage is not gonna happen at the shortest or in the future.

[Yatsan]

Lack of awareness and knowledge gaps across all levels of society hinder adoption. Admittedly, I think bitcoin experienced a slowdown in popularity at first. Bitcoin has to undergo a natural evolution into a high volatility asset first to get a lot of attention.
The biggest barrier to adoption right now is (regulation aside), not a few people who currently feel like they've missed the train when BTC hit ATH, and some FUD when the market is sick.

Not awareness alone but I guess the world is not ready yet for this technology regarding volatile market value and especially for non-investors. Indeed Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are profitable but it won't always be on upside. There will always be time for downfalls in this market which is not something to be endured by all people. Think of this; salaries are in form of cryprocurrencies. Those who are earning minimum wage would be at risk of having not enough money during bearish market because of losses. And if it would coexist with fiat(which is more likely to happen), businesses wpuld be on the same situation. This dimply points out that people are not ready yet to risk for this industry.

[Ayers]

Lack of awareness and knowledge gaps across all levels of society hinder adoption. Admittedly, I think bitcoin experienced a slowdown in popularity at first. Bitcoin has to undergo a natural evolution into a high volatility asset first to get a lot of attention.
The biggest barrier to adoption right now is (regulation aside), not a few people who currently feel like they've missed the train when BTC hit ATH, and some FUD when the market is sick.

Lack of awareness or knowledge gap, the root cause of these problems is government, because of the government ban, spreading negative news about bitcoin makes people not want to learn about bitcoin. The biggest barrier to the mass adoption of bitcoin is none other than the government, as long as the government regulates and propagates bitcoin in a positive way, the problems you raise will quickly be solved. The government will still largely determine our perception because we live under their control.

[michellee]

The main hindrance to the adoption process is that people haven't been able to open up to something new and instead say something new is not good for them to do. They tend to spread lies to others who want to learn about that new thing.

The government must change the system but doesn't seem ready to do it because there is still a lack of knowledge about crypto, especially from the top to the lowest level. This makes many people still afraid to learn more about crypto, especially if more lies about crypto are spread to the public. Everyone must change their mindset. We need to open ourselves up to accept something and not immediately judge that it's bad.

[Pmalek]

He claimed that 3.7 million coins are lost, with the remaining coins being held on chains by early adopters.

All units are on the bitcoin blockchain and none of them are technically lost. What can be lost are the private keys that allow those coins to move. But no matter if the BTC is on an exchange, your mobile wallet, or a paper wallet, they are and will always be on the blockchain.

I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.
I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?

What a terrible idea. You want to punish those who believed in this economy more than you do or because they entered the market with more money than you or long before you...

Bitcoin is freedom and allowing you to make your own decisions. If those decisions include buying millions of coins, then that's your right. If you don't want whales to own so many coins, don't sell them cheaply on the market whenever some bad news about bitcoin gets posted. Tell your friends and everyone you know. It's an open market, but no one can buy your coins if you don't want to sell them. Look at me right now not selling you my coins because I don't want to.

Bitcoin doesn't have restrictions. 

[crunck]

The biggest problem is still the government, if the government accepts it as legal and declares that bitcoin is a currency or a worth asset holding, then I believe all other problems will be solved.  Government is the biggest hurdle that bitcoin is facing, just solve the government, bitcoin will be widely accepted. But that possibility is improbable unless the government sees some interest in accepting bitcoin.

[mk4]

Price volatility will almost always make people stray away from bitcoin. But as the "whales" sell their bitcoin, the coins will simply just be redistributed — slowly but surely.

Take note: The number of people that buys bitcoin at least once can have huge spikes depending on market condition. But the number of people that will be convinced with the importance of bitcoin will be very slow and gradual.

[pooya87]

In the coming years, according to Bitcoin experts, adoption will increase.

Bitcoin adoption is always on the rise. The rate is changing and also the quality of it.
For example during the end of the bull markets when we are close to the peak the adoption is mostly lazy gamblers who think they can make a quick buck (ie. low quality adoption). During bear markets we get more people who believe in Bitcoin's principles rather than profit making (ie. high quality adoption).

He claimed that 3.7 million coins are lost, with the remaining coins being held on chains by early adopters.

Both of these statements are weak guesses since we have no way of measuring either one of these and the fact that everyone makes a guess that is wildly different from others proves these are very weak gueses!

He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy.

There are many different ways that bitcoin market could be affected and market manipulation is a very real challenge that we face. But it is not a specific set of people and they can't always get what they want. For example during 2017 we clearly saw many occasions where "whales" tried to go against the market (shorted bitcoin thinking it should dump) and lost millions of dollars hence failed to manipulate the market.

I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.
I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?

You are right that this will hinder adoption (meaning it will prevent it) because people would dump such a currency that puts such a limit on how much of it they can own.

[so98nn]

Perhaps, there will never be mass adoption of the bitcoin hence we will never encounter the problem of running out of the bitcoins really. So technically speaking we will still have enough bitcoins (/Satoshi) to trade amongst us. Hodling, selling these processes will continue to improve over the time. There may be few forks along the way so it can shift users or investors temporarily to the other coins. In short there is always plenty of room which can sustain bitcoin and its usefulness over the period. Of course this can be challenged with counter debate but seems best possible scenario….

[The Cryptovator]

Limits do not apply to true decentralized cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin. Bitcoin adapted massively, but the market crashed incident that occurred. It will take time to regain investor confidence. Only whales can't help Bitcoin adapt. Institutional investors must adapt to Bitcoin. Whales only play with it; real adaptation requires large investors. I don't see any promising signs of a price recovery anytime soon. We'll have to see how the new year affects the crypto market.

[tjtonmoy]

Bitcoin is always growing and introducing new kind of use cases every day. Mass adoption does not come with a problem. People will still have traditional fiat currency for regular buy, sell of products. And if the people who hold a huge portion of bitcoin (not confirmed yet) decides to manipulate the market, then there will always be other people willing to do the opposite. Such as, pump in price by whales - people will sell. Dump in price by whales - people will buy.
And those who are holding for decades now, won't let go of their holdings. That's just how I see the market.

[Bitstar_coin]

~Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.

It is impossible for BTC to overcome centralized authority since the market is open and free for everyone to buy as much btc as they can afford.
The problem with adoption is not just because the whales or centralized authorities have access to a large amount of btc to manipulate the market but also because the majority of investors (whether small or big) see btc as a speculative asset than an alternative currency. So what needs to change is peoples perception.

[serjent05]

He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.

However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.

I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?


Happy Christmas 🎄🎄

Your suggestion constitutes making the Bitcoin network centralized.  Making a limit on an individual's bitcoin holding is nothing but dictatorship.  This goes against the ideal of freedom, Bitcoin wanted to convey.  Bitcoin at its current state of distribution is almost perfect.  Besides, people who put more effort into Bitcoin are rewarded accordingly.  Your suggestion discourages extra effort and will most probably hinder the growth of Bitcoin because your idea caps the opportunity and capacity of every individual to acquire more Bitcoin.  You are removing the competition that gives life to the marketplace and the growth of Bitcoin price and value.

You wanted to avoid manipulation but instead, implement manipulation at its core.