Very informative, I was not around for any of this. My main concern about scaling really just boils down to one thing. When I hear people say that eventually the majority of people won’t even be able to afford to hold their own keys, I find it highly concerning. The ability to self custody is one of the most important things that differentiates it from gold or the fiat system. If that is lost, it seems like a really big problem to me. I realize the base chain doesn’t need to scale for coffee payments, but if you can’t self custody it seems not much different than holding gold in a 3rd party’s vault. What is the optimistic perspective on how this could play out?
Login to reply
Replies (1)
A valid concern for me as well. Trusted third-party solutions seem like the only way bitcoin scales for everyday payments. If that's the case, the goal would be figuring out how to make the trust required to be as miniscule as possible and or distributed across many custodians.
I'm keeping an eye on the Liquid federated security model and also on eCash ideas where multiple mints back the tokens. I'm hopeful that this problem can be solved. It is also why I see a possible future where physical silver and gold can return as a daily, in-person Medium of Exchange (trustless bearer assets) and bitcoin captures the Store of Value role.
With that said, we may just end up with trusted, third-party custodians for small payments, and real, on-chain bitcoin for Store of Value meaning 99% of global population does not have enough savings to justify real, on-chain bitcoin and has to trust someone to custody their bitcoin. They didn't refer to silver as "poor man's gold" for no reason. Silver and gold could become "poor man's bitcoin."