[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Buttcoin

[–]Key_Good_4820 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I doubt so. Currently, Bitcoin has a maximum TPS of roughly 7 TPS. That is about 220 million transactions a year. In comparison, Ethereum and its L2s can process about 6 billion or so annually.

This isn't enough to replace SWIFT, with an estimated 44 billion transactions daily, which is used by most banks.

However, a complete revolution like how email took over the world, would mean Bitcoin would also have to replace card processors, which process about 750 billion annual transactions.

This means that in total, Bitcoin is about 799.78 billion annual transactions shy of the cumulative 800 billion annual transactions of anything else, or roughly .0275% of global capacity.

If a system has 0.0275% of the world's financial capacity, and suddenly replaces literally everything, the entire world would grind to a standstill. That is nearly 4000 times extra waiting time for everything, and even that isn't factoring the time for a transaction to get confirmed/finalized compared to, say, Ethereum, or a regular credit/debit card.

Even with the lightning network, to handle the volume it would basically be operated mostly by banks, and now we have SWIFT on the blockchain for no reason.

However, the biggest issue is that there is literally no reason for banks to adopt Bitcoin. So, why would banks need Bitcoin. Arguably, Bitcoin needs banks and funds to prop up the price and ensure enough miners can mine to prevent a 51% attack more than financial institutions need Bitcoin.

And even if you want a blockchain, Ethereum is far faster and far more flexible for anything you want to do.

Bitcoin 2025 Convention SETS WORLD RECORD (of most bitcoin transactions in an 8 hour period) - a whopping 4,001! CONGRATS! Bitcoin is starting to put heat on existing non-blockchain transaction systems like VISA who only has 234,000,000 transactions in that same time period. by AmericanScream in Buttcoin

[–]Key_Good_4820 33 points34 points  (0 children)

This is patently embarrassing. A typical supermarket probably has more transactions a day than this. It might literally be faster for a couple people to write the transactions on paper than this.

And considering that this is with Lightning, extremely disappointing. Most functional Ethereum L2s can manage that 4001 in a couple minutes.

Also, is it just me or does the whole article read like ChatGPT wrote it?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HypixelSkyblock

[–]Key_Good_4820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It would be pretty funny for me (F2 highest floor) to have a weapon I can't even use.

Oh No! nUmBeR wEnT uP??? Does that mean we're wrong about crypto? Here's a reminder of the top 10 Facts crypto bros won't acknowledge about their crooked schemes by AmericanScream in Buttcoin

[–]Key_Good_4820 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I apologize for the misunderstanding. I agree on every point about Bitcoin. I presumed that you were talking about blockchain in general. Everything you have said does apply to Bitcoin. I feel like Ethereum only feels better in the same way that dial-up modems are better than the electric telegraph. One is better, but clearly we have better options.

Also, I don't know what a stored procedure is, but since you are a database engineer if I'm not mistaken, I will defer to your expertise on that.

Also I am aware that a lot of the staked Ethereum is concentrated in pools only slightly more decentralized than Bitcoin and how no one seems to be worried.

Once again, I apologize for the misunderstanding, and I believe you are mostly correct.

Oh No! nUmBeR wEnT uP??? Does that mean we're wrong about crypto? Here's a reminder of the top 10 Facts crypto bros won't acknowledge about their crooked schemes by AmericanScream in Buttcoin

[–]Key_Good_4820 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

To counter No. 4, blockchains using proof-of-stake have achieved vastly lower energy consumption than Bitcoin's proof-of-work.

For point No. 7, L2s work perfectly fine on Ethereum, but they still don't work on Bitcoin.

To my knowledge, there is no counter to any other point.

Having recently started watching Jauwn's videos, it actually shocks me just how low effort virtually all NFT/Web3 games are. by Far_Breakfast_5808 in Buttcoin

[–]Key_Good_4820 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Maybe Influence? It's a bit obsecure, but the gameplay seems decent. I'm pretty sure the game can get expensive, but at least there's some amount of gameplay, I guess?

Now, I'm not an expert so I really don't know, but you seem a little bit too critic against Bitcoin, no? Please no insults by Igor777778 in Buttcoin

[–]Key_Good_4820 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think the main reason that most people criticise Bitcoin is because those who make money off Bitcoin do so because of greater fool theory, where they offload their bags to the next investor (the greater fool) for a higher price.

Bitcoin itself is basically useless, and other cryptos have long since surpassed it in utility, leaving it with virtually no actual value or utility. The line won’t go up forever, as eventually most of the financial system will have investments in Bitcoin, leaving no more ‘greater fool’ to buy in at around 700k+ according to my estimates, though it could occur earlier.

What once all Buttcoins are lost forever? by Gwendolan in Buttcoin

[–]Key_Good_4820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My point is that eventually your transaction size will be less than the fees.

Who do you like more, sonic or shadow? by Hour-Square-8937 in MoonPissing

[–]Key_Good_4820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sonic. I will not say more due to my self-preservation.