Please stop blaming "the government" for lack of Bitcoin mass payment adoption

[legiteum]

[...]

Also, not really fair to say fees are too expensive and blockchain can't handle it, because of course none of this is going to happen on the base layer of Bitcoin. Payments are all going to be done at 2nd layer, centralized networks, side chains, etc. Mostly only large payments, moving a decent amount of money, on-boarding/off-boarding payment solution networks, or batch transactions are going to be on-chain. Obviously nobody is going to be paying an on-chain fee, even if it is only like $2 to buy $20 of groceries.

I completely agree that something that is not Bitcoin can handle worldwide transaction volume. Take Haypenny for instance.

Of course the question people will ask is, why have a 2nd layer at all? If there is a digital currency that truly scales to worldwide transaction volume (or a platform that supports a multitude of such currencies), then why worry about the "first" layer?

[...] but the sorts of people that blame the govt for everything are usually loons anyway.

 

Of course the MAIN reason why Bitcoin doesn't have mass payment adoption yet is because it doesn't have mass ownership adoption yet, plus most people would mostly use it so save with right now, not spend. You don't get mass demand for payments until (1) there is already mass ownership, and (2) a ton of that user base have been owning bitcoin for a long time so that they've seen lots of appreciation and feel okay starting to spend it, and probably (3) bitcoin price appreciation has slowed down to earthly level so that it becomes a bit more reasonable to spend bitcoin rather than only save it.

Bitcoin being widely held won't make any difference--the same technical limitations will be there regardless of how many individual holders there are.

Mass payment is the end game for bitcoin - it is the final stage of bitcoin adoption as it grows organically from one person to mass adoption.

Bitcoin (the actual Bitcoin and not some system that "theoretically represents" Bitcoin that isn't actually Bitcoin) will never get mass adoption in terms of transactions because of blockchain's technical limitations.

We are already in the final stage of Bitcoin adoption with the ETF: it is now a mainstream investment instrument. Bitcoin does not have a future as a mainstream means of transacting e.g. as a currency.

[...]
and by the 2040s I think we'll see the payments phase really get going in a large way.

Maybe. I'm personally going to bet that even in 2045, the speed of light is still only going to travel at 186k miles per second, so blockchain's technical limitations will still be there .

For me the phases of Bitcoin will look like this:

1. Bitcoin establishes itself as a mainstream investment instrument (today).

2. A viable non-blockchain digital currency system emerges that has a better user model and can scale to worldwide transaction volume.

3. Somebody uses that currency platform to front Bitcoin transactions (and all kinds of other transactions), meaning end-users only actually interact directly with the non-blockchain system when they transact.

4. At some point lots of people wonder why Bitcoin and other blockchain currencies even exist since they never actually see them or interact with them ("what is a private key?", they ask).

Will Bitcoin survive being "layered" by systems that actually work for the masses? Who knows. But ask any major technology company whether they'd rather own layer one or layer two .

[God bless u]

Bitcoin was never supposed to replace fiat and become the primary method of payment for everything in the world, it was created to become an alternative for peer-to-peer transactions that would provide complete privacy and decentralization to its users whereas traditional financial systems fail badly at this because you can't do anything with your finances without them knowing because the current financial platforms you use are centralized and are always under supervision.
People that think Bitcoin can replace cash and become the primary mode of payment for everything and there will be no fiat currencies anymore should understand that this isn't going to happen. However, Bitcoin has it's advantages over the centralized financial platforms.

[stompix]

These are the reasons there is not mainstream adoption of Bitcoin for everyday payments, not some conspiracy by "the government".

Neah, you missed the most important one:
"Why should I spend my coins when the havening is near and the new ATH will be over $200k"

This is why Bitcoin fails as a payment method, because the vast majority of "users" are not interested in actually using as in returns.
The fees and the slow time for confirmations are excuses, we had last year weeks of 1satvb next block transactions being possible, what did that mean? That there was no actual usage, what happened with ordinals was just a different issue, yo can see how fees are going down right now back to 10sat/b , you can get a tx for half a dollar not $30 as you mentioned, this means only one thing, there is no actual demand for those tx!

As long as there is hope of making 4x 5x in a year just by holding coins you will see no use of it as a mainstream payment method!

[franky1]

These are the reasons there is not mainstream adoption of Bitcoin for everyday payments, not some conspiracy by "the government".

Neah, you missed the most important one:
"Why should I spend my coins when the havening is near and the new ATH will be over $200k"

This is why Bitcoin fails as a payment method, because the vast majority of "users" are not interested in actually using as in returns.
The fees and the slow time for confirmations are excuses, we had last year weeks of 1satvb next block transactions being possible, what did that mean? That there was no actual usage, what happened with ordinals was just a different issue, yo can see how fees are going down right now back to 10sat/b , you can get a tx for half a dollar not $30 as you mentioned, this means only one thing, there is no actual demand for those tx!

As long as there is hope of making 4x 5x in a year just by holding coins you will see no use of it as a mainstream payment method!

i have been to many countries spoke to many people as individuals and businesses and when many speak of bitcoin in less developed countries, they liked(past tense) the idea of a currency that can remit and offer payments for commerce.. but then returning years later they said the fee's were the reason they stopped accepting bitcoin as payment
they also noted the temporary drop in fee's didnt last long enough to promote accepting bitcoin for goods again before the spam restarted..
never did they say they stopped due to preferring it as investment, nor did they say about customer preferring to hoard for fomo.. they were annoyed by the fees.

countries where $1-$10 is a days wage is why developing countries dont adopt bitcoin as a payment option for commerce
(and dont reply thinking its an opportunity to promote the flawed sandbox test of bugs of the subnetwork you think billions of developing countries should use, so dont try advertising it as much as you have at as many opportunities as you have.. stick to caring and concentrating on BITCOIN not other network promotions)

[davis196]

And then there's the usage model. Not only does any new technology that replaces the exact functionality of an existing one need to be far cheaper in order to have a chance, it needs to be easier for end-users, too. Requiring every consumer to have a private key is something we've been dreaming about since about 1994 (I was there Smiley), but its a pain in the ass that most consumers don't want to deal with.

I agree with that statement, but what if BTC transaction become cheaper and the usage of cold wallets becomes more user friendly?
I know that it's close to impossible for the BTC blockchain to beat the fiat payment systems in terms of fees and transaction quantity, but what if Bitcoin upgrades to another level, or what if a better altcoin gets invented?
Bitcoin already got mass adoption as a speculative investment/"digital gold", I don't think that BTC will ever get mass adoption as an actual currency. The first problem is price volatility, the second problem is that there's no point for the businesses to invest in a BTC/crypto payment gateway infrastructure, because it's not worth it.

[alexforneus]

There are still not so much bitcoiners in the world and even less of them are ready to spend crypto. That's the reason

[0t3p0t]

Well, to be honest even with the banning of Bitcoin in a specific country I think we can still interact with it by using VPN's but yeah I don't have problems using both assets alongside each other so there is no need for me to blame the government because they don't ban it here in my country. Regulations only works on local and international exchanges that is registered here in my country and it's all working good. It's convenient and fun using fiat on a daily basis and at the same time using Bitcoin as an investment.

[Natsuu]

Well, to be honest even with the banning of Bitcoin in a specific country I think we can still interact with it by using VPN's but yeah I don't have problems using both assets alongside each other so there is no need for me to blame the government because they don't ban it here in my country. Regulations only works on local and international exchanges that is registered here in my country and it's all working good. It's convenient and fun using fiat on a daily basis and at the same time using Bitcoin as an investment.

Right. VPNs can be a sneaky way to still mess around with Bitcoin even if a country says no. Luckily no bans in your neck of the woods so you're rocking both fiat and Bitcoin without a hitch. Using regular money for day-to-day stuff and keeping Bitcoin as your investment sidekick sounds like a sweet combo like convenience meets some crypto fun

[Furious 7]

Bitcoin was never supposed to replace fiat and become the primary method of payment for everything in the world, it was created to become an alternative for peer-to-peer transactions that would provide complete privacy and decentralization to its users whereas traditional financial systems fail badly at this because you can't do anything with your finances without them knowing because the current financial platforms you use are centralized and are always under supervision.
People that think Bitcoin can replace cash and become the primary mode of payment for everything and there will be no fiat currencies anymore should understand that this isn't going to happen. However, Bitcoin has it's advantages over the centralized financial platforms.

The initial concept that we have always understood until now about bitcoin is not as a replacement but as an option. We must be able to distinguish between payment options and substitutes in payments because in this case bitcoin is not a substitute because fiat and legal currency of the current government remains a major payment method and we certainly know that.

I think in this case we ourselves are the ones who actually impose a little will because after all fiat is still fiat which will remain a primary part of our needs regardless of the existence of bitcoin or not fiat will remain the main payment. As for bitcoin, it is only as a companion if we want to use it but it is also not a real force.
Do not as if to say that all those in bitcoin have a desire that bitcoin is recognized and made as a legal payment replacing fiat because not all are like that which is precisely if we hold fast to things like this misunderstanding will widen and make it seem as if people who are in bitcoin are dissidents because they do not obey the government who wants a new revolution in the payment system and replace fiat with bitcoin.

[DanWalker]

Bitcoin was never supposed to replace fiat and become the primary method of payment for everything in the world, it was created to become an alternative for peer-to-peer transactions that would provide complete privacy and decentralization to its users whereas traditional financial systems fail badly at this because you can't do anything with your finances without them knowing because the current financial platforms you use are centralized and are always under supervision.
People that think Bitcoin can replace cash and become the primary mode of payment for everything and there will be no fiat currencies anymore should understand that this isn't going to happen. However, Bitcoin has it's advantages over the centralized financial platforms.

Satoshi also never mentioned whether bitcoin would replace or completely destroy the current monetary system. These misunderstandings are largely of our own making and have spread to this day. Many people feel disgusted with fiat, banks and they worship bitcoin, from there they propagate that bitcoin will defeat the government monetary system. But because of this inaccurate propaganda, it has also unintentionally caused misunderstandings between banks, governments and bitcoin. They believe that bitcoin is a real threat and there have been many bans of bitcoin over the years.

Personally, I think that even if bitcoin does not become an asset like what is happening, bitcoin will never be able to become the main currency of the world, it will never happen. As long as the government still controls this world, bitcoin or any coin will never become the main currency without recognition.

[hatshepsut93]

And yet in the face of these facts, a near constant refrain from many crypto enthusiasts is that the reason Bitcoin hasn't replaced the world's sovereign currencies like the USD and the Euro is because there's a conspiracy of government regulations to stop it.

Because most crypto enthusiasts have very little understanding of how government works and what they can do. If government really hated Bitcoin, they would take very simple steps - ordering banks to stop servicing large crypto trading platforms and a bit harder but still doable - monitor p2p transfers and freeze suspect traders. This alone would destroy 99.9% of Bitcoin liquidity and Bitcoin would be traded mostly for cash, gift cards, stolen credit cards and so on and basically it would be worth $500 or so. And true believers would still hoard it and wait for the day when government collapses and their coins become world currency.

[southerngentuk]

This mix-and-match approach reflects the confusion surrounding crypto – is it a revolutionary tech or a risky gamble? Jury's still out, but one thing's clear: legality is a major roadblock to wider adoption. But here's the twist: super strict rules might kill the fun altogether! Crypto's all about innovation, and too much red tape can stifle its potential. Finding the sweet spot between freedom and control is key.

Forcing people to adopt crypto is like forcing broccoli down your little cousin's throat – it ain't gonna work. Instead, we need organic growth fueled by education, understanding, and responsible development.

The future of crypto and governments is like a buddy cop movie – they gotta work together to make it work. Governments need to listen to the crypto crew, understand the tech, and create rules that protect people without killing the vibe. Crypto's more than just making quick bucks – it's about a whole new way of thinking about money and tech.

[legiteum]

[...]
 Jury's still out, but one thing's clear: legality is a major roadblock to wider adoption.

Can you give us a specific example? As my link in the OP shows, there are almost no countries in the world that outlaw Bitcoin. And the countries where it is legal represent about 98% of the world's economy.

Forcing people to adopt crypto is like forcing broccoli down your little cousin's throat – it ain't gonna work. Instead, we need organic growth fueled by education, understanding, and responsible development.

The future of crypto and governments is like a buddy cop movie – they gotta work together to make it work. Governments need to listen to the crypto crew, understand the tech, and create rules that protect people without killing the vibe. Crypto's more than just making quick bucks – it's about a whole new way of thinking about money and tech.

These two statements seem to contradict one another. On one hand you are saying that using the government to force people to accept Bitcoin will never work, and then you go on to say that it will require governments to... force people to use crypto.

The "buddy cop movie" approach between a private entity and the government is also known as "crony capitalism", wherein businesses extract special favors from the government in order to get ahead. Why do you think Bitcoin needs that? Why can't it succeed on its own?

And do you understand how contrary that is to Bitcoin's libertarian roots?

[franky1]

[...]
 Jury's still out, but one thing's clear: legality is a major roadblock to wider adoption.

Can you give us a specific example? As my link in the OP shows, there are almost no countries in the world that outlaw Bitcoin. And the countries where it is legal represent about 98% of the world's economy.

to be LEGAL. in actual fact is where this is legislation to permit it/ratify it as usable.. where most permit usually come with conditions
EG
drinking alcohol is legal.. as long as you are of age and not driving while drunk
centuries ago alcohol was not illegal as there were no legislation regarding alcohol centuries ago. it was wild west open to use and abuse.. until legislation came along to ratify it as legal (after prohibiting it for a time first)
and thats how they catch you. by adding terms into the ratification of legalising something, permitting, licencing it

Forcing people to adopt crypto is like forcing broccoli down your little cousin's throat – it ain't gonna work. Instead, we need organic growth fueled by education, understanding, and responsible development.

The future of crypto and governments is like a buddy cop movie – they gotta work together to make it work. Governments need to listen to the crypto crew, understand the tech, and create rules that protect people without killing the vibe. Crypto's more than just making quick bucks – it's about a whole new way of thinking about money and tech.

These two statements seem to contradict one another. On one hand you are saying that using the government to force people to accept Bitcoin will never work, and then you go on to say that it will require governments to... force people to use crypto.

The "buddy cop movie" approach between a private entity and the government is also known as "crony capitalism", wherein businesses extract special favors from the government in order to get ahead. Why do you think Bitcoin needs that? Why can't it succeed on its own?

And do you understand how contrary that is to Bitcoin's libertarian roots?

just because bitcoin has libertarian roots.. does not mean using bitcoin de-citizenises people to suddenly be outside of the jurisdiction the live..
people and businesses still need to follow the legislation of there country.. even when using bitcoin
(laws can only threaten people.. not code..(code has no brain no eyes, no ears))

yes bitcoin began with a clean slate.. no law existed to say yay or nay... it was new thus lack of yay/nay meant it was not ratified as legal. but also not declared as illegal.. thus was open to be used and treated as not illegal due to lack of legislation
(no legislation = not illegal....   legislation allowing=legal  legislation not allowing=illegal... 3 separate statuses)

but over the years legislation did begin.. and we(humans) need to ensure the legislation does not over step too far..

bitcoin has no legs, no arms. no brain, no ear, no mouth.. it cannot change or prevent laws..
PEOPLE and BUSINESSES need to scrutinise and lobby government to not overstep.. however there is a profit greed group lobbying the other way, wanting bitcoin to be treated a certain way for their own profit desires even at a cost of the libertarian way bitcoin begun

[legiteum]

however there is a profit greed group lobbying the other way, wanting bitcoin to be treated a certain way for their own profit desires even at a cost of the libertarian way bitcoin begun

I guess we shouldn't be surprised, but it's still amazing to me that something invented in the context Bitcoin was invented would now have proponents begging the government for special favors so their investment will increase in value. I'm not saying it's all Bitcoin enthusiasts or even a majority, but it's still amazing.

[franky1]

however there is a profit greed group lobbying the other way, wanting bitcoin to be treated a certain way for their own profit desires even at a cost of the libertarian way bitcoin begun

I guess we shouldn't be surprised, but it's still amazing to me that something invented in the context Bitcoin was invented would now have proponents begging the government for special favors so their investment will increase in value. I'm not saying it's all Bitcoin enthusiasts or even a majority, but it's still amazing.

its a well known term of "barrier of entry"
if they can lobby for set standards to be able to perform in an industry, it then controls the newbies and opponents from competing, especially of those lobbying for standards already meeting the standards based on their fiat policies of compliance..
thus new start-ups then need to jump over hurdles to get-in

how else do you think big businesses monopolise markets

[GbitG]

~~

So what is the solution ? Is it possible to have one system that suits the government and the people at the same time? The question is: If we get one system that is fast, low-fee, decentralized and private, will governments agree to adopt?

No Never !
The government is not even ready to accept that there is a system that is not under the supervision of the government, even if these useless governors know that they cannot stop the decentralized system, if they do not have the ability to fight against one thing. If so, he doesn't have his own wisdom, but this fool can't discover a system that has fast transactions and a low fee, and he has no interest in himself. which is required by a servant in daily life i.e., fast, low fee, and private. 
 
Why isn't the government ready to adopt Bitcoin?
 
 I have an answer
 
Actually every Governement is well aware of how great Bitcion Bitcion is and how easy it provides to humans. But the reason for not adopting is people with useless currency, i.e., Banks. This Banks system is the one that hesitates to adopt Bitcoin because in the banks that have this large number of salary holders who take salary without work, they will be on leave because of Bitcoin because blockchain will give people the option to do any time and will be able to transact in a few minutes from anywhere at a low fee.

[taufik123]

-snip- 

Why isn't the government ready to adopt Bitcoin?
 
 I have an answer
 
Actually every Governement is well aware of how great Bitcion Bitcion is and how easy it provides to humans. But the reason for not adopting is people with useless currency, i.e., Banks. This Banks system is the one that hesitates to adopt Bitcoin because in the banks that have this large number of salary holders who take salary without work, they will be on leave because of Bitcoin because blockchain will give people the option to do any time and will be able to transact in a few minutes from anywhere at a low fee.

That's actually not the main problem why governments don't want full adoption of Bitcoin.

Each government in several countries certainly has their own research and will have different problems.
It cannot be generalized that every country has the same constraints.

Banks are indeed a barrier to adoption, as traditional money is still the primary means of transaction.
But the main reason why adoption cannot be done is the application of Blockchain Technology, which cannot provide freedom of space for the government so that everything can be tracked, and the government does not have any control over it.

Governments prefer centralization, whatever they must be able to control, otherwise there will be strict regulations imposed.

[legiteum]

That's actually not the main problem why governments don't want full adoption of Bitcoin.

Each government in several countries certainly has their own research and will have different problems.
It cannot be generalized that every country has the same constraints.

Banks are indeed a barrier to adoption, as traditional money is still the primary means of transaction.
But the main reason why adoption cannot be done is the application of Blockchain Technology, which cannot provide freedom of space for the government so that everything can be tracked, and the government does not have any control over it.

Governments prefer centralization, whatever they must be able to control, otherwise there will be strict regulations imposed.

What governments are you talking about? Certainly in the USA that is not the case--Bitcoin and other cryptos are perfectly legal here.

What country do you live in where Bitcoin is being thwarted by the government?

[franky1]

Certainly in the USA that is not the case--Bitcoin and other cryptos are perfectly legal here.

Perfectly?
you might want to check the legislation terms .. its not so perfect
i preferred the era before legislation, back when bitcoin was termed 'not illegal' (separate status different to 'legal' ratified by legislation)