I love Bitcoin, but the idea that we should only have one crypto is the opposite of decentralization. It's like saying we should only have one company doing business in the world just because it does it well. Alts will continue to have their place, whether you like it or not.
-
-
That's actually a very good point that no one managed to bring before, nice one. But let me ask you, even if most money tends towards winner-take-all in a free market, does that invalidate having competition til a winner is decided? Or even afterwards as the winner could change?
-
Not to mention, does it also invalidate every other usecase possible with the blockchain tech as well? I don't think so.
-
To answer your first question, current BTC competitors are much, much weaker in terms of security, decentralization, cost of running a full node, credibility of monetary policy, existing ecosystem / monetary network effects, liquidity:pic.twitter.com/9PdSZ73JNd
-
I didn't ask you how strong they were, I asked you if they were invalid, if there isn't place for competitors.
-
I think BTC has no competition yet
-
Again, not what I asked.
-
I am providing facts and data, you’re just engaged in rhetoric. This is unproductive.
-
You're dodging questions and providing irrelevant facts and data to the questions asked. Agreed that is unproductive tho. I also just listed you usecases in the other reply since you seem to not acknowledge any. Facts and data.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.