While I am for a capitalistic free and fair market, look what power and greed lead to (Amazon, Walmart, investment firms, Airlines, legal, and anything else “Big 4” or “Big 6”). One may argue that “large companies have the manpower to innovate” true, but so does an open source platform… probably more efficient and less bureaucratic that way as well. Or “big companies do work in bulk thus making products cheaper or more efficiently” true, though that comes with a price. The price being push out the small guys because the big company can do it cheaper. But when does this “cost and resource saving” efficiency cut into quality? All for an extra raise for the few within the company?
Decentralization would allow for EVERYONE to compete fairly without one single entity holding controls
Open source allows for EVERYONE to help improve and reduces back end fuckery with transparency.
I believe this is why some governments HATE crypto. I also believe that this is the way of the future. Disagree?? State your objections.
BTC is cheaper to use than anything in the legacy system, with the lightning network making it even cheaper, more private, and instant.
Anonset is the most important factor in privacy, and hash rate means security.
Secondly, EARNING Bitcoin not tied to a KYC exchange. Be part of the economy, not just a speculator.
Bitcoin was immaculately conceived, a gift from god before our eyes. Don't miss out by gambling on shitcoins designed to lure the greedy away from the light by looking for a pump.
Fuck lightning network, that is just an overlay/middleman protocol to make the whole system more compatible with legacy systems. The ONLY reason that it's even necessary is because bitcoin was not allowed to scale beyond 1MB blocks. That limitation is essentially now baked into the cake that is BTC (which is now a radically warped version of its original self).
And don't give me any crap about SegWit or Taproot. Those technologies are, again, only necessary for building legacy-type applications on top of a decentralized foundation, which is not natively compatible, and the problems those solve were ALREADY solved by bitcoin originally and then re-introduced by disabling functions and preventing bitcoin from scaling its block size.
The protest movement to all of this became known as Bitcoin Cash and that's why it is one of the most hated cryptocurrencies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYHFrf5ci_g
Watch this and then tell me how LN is not an exact replica of central banking on top of bitcoin.
Have fun staying poor.
Found Michael Saylor lol
What an awful take. Your argument against a great side-option to BTC is essentially "I dont like it".
If that's all you got from my comment then you obviously didn't actually read it or take any time to comprehend it.
I'm going to configure lightning network for Bitcoin Cash and deploy it at my company's existing gateways just to make your silly stance even sillier.
Lightning network is fully optional and has utility, just like centralized exchanges have utility even though they are no better than legacy systems for crypto.
Do you consider crypto only valid if you're running your own node on your own hardware running some open source OS that you've vetted yourself? Lol
Just watched the video, silly conclusion. Hubs of course can be opened by any entity in the world, I'll use an established trusted hub of my choosing, if they even attempt to corrupt, I'll simply switch to a different hub. This is a valid form of decentralization.