The interesting thing about that chart is that ETH has completely centralized even though they only process about double the number of transactions as base layer BTC. And in terms of the global txn capacity issue they haven't solved anything. That chart actually looks to me like proof that Bitcoiners are right.
Not necessarily true. All depends on rate of adoption and rate of consumer tech advancements/protocol improvements which is a risk for any crypto if the former surpasses the latter.
If Bitcoin ever has a steep enough rate of adoption it would fail too. We get glimpses of this every time transactions go crazy like a few months ago. Even Lightning barely works when that happens.
Last part definitely isn't true. Litecoin and Doge regularly surpasses Bitcoin in transactions and Ethereum is always way ahead.
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-btc-eth-doge-ltc.html#1y
Discussion
Didn't you just mention Ecash as the solution in your last reply? Isnt ecash centralized and ruggable?
You guys are blinded by hate for other crypto without seeing trade offs (EXCEPT WHEN IT COMES TO BITCOIN LAYERS!!! THEN ITS OK!!!). If I slapped on the word "Bitcoin" onto anything piece of trash and started making the podcast rounds and spitting buzzwords yall would gobble it up whatever it was
Competitive ecash pools where no one needs to hold any money for any length of time & no one ever needs to put all of their money, are a great additional options. Why is it that you can't tell the difference between a weak foundation & some optional thing that makes reasonable tradeoffs?
Oh now trade offs are okay just not with an other crypto lmao
All your caveats sounds like this
Foundation vs an extra option that isn't required
Comments like this make it clear none of you are arguing in good faith. You aren't even trying to understand.
Yea, they even cheer for Liquid, a privately owned sidechain which is under full control of a federation and which earns all the fees..