Saurabh Narayan Singh, Blockchain Developer at Fortiss - An-Institut Technische Universität München (2017-present)
Répondu il y a 43w
The biggest limitation of Bitcoin is glaringly obvious, but I would like to provide some context first.
Bitcoin saw their first spectacular rise in and around Nov-Dec 2013 when it first reached 1000$. By the end of 2014, Bitcoin had stabilized and was trading at a comfortable 250–350$ range. This was also the period when people were becoming more and more interested and a buzz around Bitcoin was consuming a larger audience than it’s niche. Higher audience led to more scrutiny and experts looked under the hood of Bitcoin.
By 2015, Bitcoin wasn’t a niche anymore. Technical analysis revealed that Bitcoin was suffering from a massive scalibility problem. A problem none of the trading markets, stock managers or your portfolio handlers wanted you to know about, let alone worry about it. Take a look at some of these headlines,
And this article,
Au début de 2016 Bitcoins transactions were already slow enough to be frustrating.
And mind you, this wasn’t a currency which was being used in form of a debit/credit card to pay for your daily groceries or Pizza. This was a currency only being transferred on it’s trading platforms. At a rate of 1 Transaction per second. Visa supports 2000 - 1000 tps.
Mike Hearn was one of the developers in the core Bitcoin network. He wrote a blog, “Resolution of the Bitcoin experiment”1 where he talks in detail about the major drawbacks of the Bitcoin. Just take a look at this excerpt from his post,
I would suggest going through his blog to get the real picture. But since this blog was written in 2016, I shall continue.
Maintenant dans 2017 the problem is real. Some more article snippets to add to the context.
Such articles/blogs/posts or some variant of them are present on each and every coin exchange website. To improve this, Bitcoin promised segwitz, an improvement that was supposed to make transactions faster. But that failed miserably too.
In one of these cases, a Bitcoiner paid 60$ as transaction fees for one transaction and at the end of 3 days, it was still not confirmed. Some users even had to suffer through a wait time for weeks.
Imagine a real world scenario, where you order a pizza using your Bitcoin wallet. It is entirely possible that you end up paying 60 $ as the transaction fees to buy a 10 $ pizza. If you are lucky, then 3 days after the payment, a confirmation will be sent to the pizza guy and you’ll get your pizza in 3 days and 30 mins. That’s a hell lot of wait for a pizza, don’t you think?
So, scalability is a problem. But why are the transaction fees so high and volatile?
Bitcoin blockchain is designed in a way that the miners gain incentive by mining your block. This technical mumbo-jumbo means that someone gets paid when you make a transaction. And that someone is paid by you. So it is obvious that such a person would prefer finishing those transactions which pay him more than other transactions. That’s why the transaction fees are higher. People pay more so that their transactions can be processed. You can very easily notice the problem in this design. It is possible that a transaction with very low fees, may never get confirmed.
But the biggest problems of all is that the people who manage Bitcoin are not doing anything about it.
Bitcoin is not managed by a formal institution but by a group of people with different opinions. And they aren’t able to make a consensus about improving it. There was a open civil war going on between the core developers back in 2016 which resulted in a Bitcoin fork. People who decided to improve Bitcoin, forked the original and created a new currency. They were shunned by some in Bitcoin community.
There are some more, but I think this answer is long enough as it is.
Notes de bas de page
Paul King, Owner | PMKing Trading LLC (2002-present)
Répondu il y a 55w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 55 et de vues de réponses 72.4k
When talking about limitations we need to define what the context is:
- Bitcoin technical limitations as a crypto-currency implemented on a de-centralized, fully replicated blockchain technology.
- Bitcoin limitations as a commodity that can be used as a store of value as an alternative to buying physical assets like gold or silver as a protection from debasement of your domestic fiat currency but not a replacement for it.
- Bitcoin limitations as an alternative currency one can purchase products and services in, and use as an alternative to your domestic fiat currency and fiat currency credit/debit cards/bank accounts etc.
For 1 the main limitations are that with a fixed blocksize (currently 1MB) and a difficulty/proof of work model designed to crate 1 block every 10 minutes, this puts a physical cap on the possible number of transactions per second (as other answers have noted).
A secondary limitation with 1 is the fact that the blockchain is fully replicated so that every single node has to store a full copy of the entire blockchain. This has serious implications for any kind of usage that requires say, all retail locations that want to process BTC transactions, to have a terminal with enough storage for the entire blockchain going forward.
For 2 the main limitations primarily the government legislation in your particular domicile. There are already services that allow you to deposit fiat currency and then purchase BTC, and it is relatively easy to then move the BTC into a personal wallet (online, offline, or paper) in order to have BTC as a store of value.
For 3 there are significant barriers to BTC becoming a real alternative currency even if the transaction and node storage issues already mentioned can be overcome.
Apart from the immense lengths the incumbent payment processing and credit card providers would go to, to protect their current oligopoly, adoption of BTC as a true alternative electronic currency would require government to recognize BTC as a currency, rather than a commodity similar to gold. In my opinion this ain’t gonna happen, in the same way you’re not going to be allowed to pay your taxes in gold bars or tins of beans.
Chip Smith, a étudié le Blockchain Expert à la Harvard-Westlake School
Répondu il y a 56w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 476 et de vues de réponses 3.7m
This is a complicated topic, but multifaceted there is simple answer.
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon came out and dismissing bitcoin and predicting its collapse. He says it is in a bubble, but if he is right, and the bubble does crash like the DOT COM boom that would be horrific.
Looking at my charts, I can suggest that bitcoin, digital currency trading volume will 'soon surpass' Apple's. That is insane, and if that continues we will not see a collapse.
Trading among digital currencies is exploding, Jens Nordvig, founder and CEO of Exante Data. Its about supply and demand, so if demand just suddenly fell off a cliff so to, will the price of bitcoin.
The only thing I am worried about would be that Governments will close down bitcoin and cryptocurrencies if they get too big, or they could start to put some sort of regulation on it.
I think, first bitcoin must overcome its wild reputation first, so far that has not happend. Liquidity may be to blame for cryptocurrency bitcoin's volatile nature, and its a very savage and volatile beast. So this is something else I am looking at.
Banks are getting up and taking notice of bitcoin in 2017, so they might collaborate with the government to try and slow it down. I am sure sure, but bankers differ vastly to that of bitcoin investors and enthusiasts.
Overall I think the biggest risks are :
- all out SELL OFF, crash or collapse in bitcoin due to very overbought levels we are currently witnessing.
- Govt regulations or govt deciding to step in and limit or restrict it somehow.
Padmanabh Kulkarni, Blockchain dabbler since its early days.
Répondu il y a 56w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 122 et de vues de réponses 221.5k
I have been following Bitcoin since it first came out after the crash in 2008, when I accidentally bumped into it while checking BitTorrent protocol. The specific item I was checking was, how BitTorrent protocol can be used to replicate and persist huge transaction logs over multiple machines, instead of, one by one replication. That use case works like a charm and shows huge speed improvement in archiving and replication.
So I thought it was an obvious extension of that idea to globally peer-replicated transaction logs/DB which is what Bitcoin essentially is.
My persistent problem with it since then has been that, it's still not industrial strength as they call it. The first block chain sync took 2–3 days then on 256 K connection. I was not able to get any transaction committed on the chain then within 15 minutes. And the mining was really draining my PC.
PCs and internet speeds have improved, and we have FPGA miners now, but surprisingly, the problems have stayed pretty much same.
- The chain keeps becoming unweildy to keep consistent across peers.
- Transaction times are still bad.
- The mining keeps draining a lot of power, which is bound to come under regulator scrutiny sooner or later.
I'm not sure about the absolute latest on Blockchain tech, but my opinion has always been to
- Fais-le eventually consistent on the peer-connected version, like the big data map-reduce operations, but provide provisional, near instant confirmation to the end user. So it stays peer-updated but the UX does not suffer, rather, it becomes smoother/better than card payments.
- Make compensatory transactions possible on the chain, which should be synced against the wallet as part of protocol, when the wallet gets used next time. This will allow reverting/refund, which is also another problem with current tech.
- Proof of work needs a rethink, especially, from power consumption POV. I'm not that up to date on proof of stake I must say. But yes, the mechanism needs a serious upgrade.
- The politics in the core team has to go. If the intention is to keep core technology gratuit and in public interest, then it should be managed more like Wikipedia. Most FOSS projects die because of this core issue. No one takes réal la possession. Me is more bullish on ETH because of this.
Uncertain, but interesting times ahead indeed.
min Parc, Conseil en marketing Blockchain (https://krown.io)
Répondu il y a 44w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 378 et de vues de réponses 1.7m
Original question: “What are the greatest limitations of Bitcoin?”
There are several big limitations when it comes to the future of the Bitcoin network. These limitations mostly concern the currency’s high transaction time, lower than ideal adoption rates and similar issues including potential legal problems. Governments simply aren’t ready to embrace the concept of Bitcoin and there is hardly a chance of Bitcoin becoming acknowledged by the regular economic system for the time being. Simply, without any central institution that is in control of the fluctuation of its value, it is rather hard to influence the price of Bitcoin. There is a finite amount of Bitcoin in circulation, which makes it very similar to gold. The value will keep rising, which will create some difficulties actually buying something with Bitcoin.
Every negative statement by government officials regarding Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general decreases adoption rates. For something that was designed to become a valid, everyday method of payment it is important that there is global acceptance. Bitcoin recently became a familiar name globally, yet most people still don’t really understand the concept of Bitcoin. Adoption comes in waves, and by now Bitcoin has been accepted by innovators and early adopters. They are mostly intelligent and well-educated people and for Bitcoin adoption by this audience was an easy task to achieve. The remaining, much larger portion of the global population is much harder to convince to accept Bitcoin since they are generally a more conservative crowd.
Block times and transaction times are incredibly high, especially because of the amount of computational power behind the network and all the miners within it. The protocol for transactions must be upgraded to some extent in order to speed up the process. Most people are not going to pay with Bitcoin if the payment process can last for more than a few hours in certain occasions. When it comes to computational power, there are reasonable concerns that it will decrease once all the coins are mined. Already, there is no chance of mining Bitcoin from your home. There are some suggestions that it should be resolved by including small fees per transaction to help miners continue making a profit from their businesses.
Sumukh Shetty, Co-fondateur d'Ezether.com (2017-present)
Répondu il y a 83w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 124 et de vues de réponses 216.4k
For any organization to excel, there needs to be coherence in terms of what they envision the organiztion should do. But when politics and factions creep in, it becomes toxic for the organization
With the Bitcoin foundation, there is two different factions trying to push their own agenda, and both have completely different visions of where bitcoin should be. The only leader they had, left ! This has created an organization that is stuck in vacuum.
Without the bitcoin foundation working on making the protocol better, we are going to be stuck with the same technology that we got 8 years back. Will they come to a consensus on the future ? I’m not sure.
I still bet long on bitcoin as an asset, but as a currency it won’t move forwards if it can’t scale the system to millions of transactions. The wait times for transactions are huge now, and miner fees for each transaction are increasing exponentially. Lightning network would help solve this but its yet to be implemented,.
But the ethereum foundation on the other hand has a clear vision and a clear set of goals. The foundation is working on cutting edge stuff, working on improving multiple aspects of blockchain technology exponentially.