Nostr Web Client

Can somebody give me a plausible explanation to how bitcoin with 7 TPS on base chain could satify 8 billion people’s need for transactions WITHOUT TRUSTED third parties?

7 transactions per second means 220 million transactions maximum per year. With 8 billion people to transact this means that you could do 1 transaction every 36 years.

Lightning? Well that won’t do it. Arc? I have no idea.

So the Bitcoin maximalists are waving away this question and I suspect that this is because they don’t have a clue how to answer it either. ”Big block retards” ”Shit coins” ”Sovereign money” ”Bitcoin is Truth, don’t you UNDERSTAND?!?”

No I don’t understand how bitcoin could become a medium of exchange WITHOUT TRUSTED THIRD PARTIES.

Bitcoin is the best Store Of Value, but it certainly is not a perfect one, and it is a LOUSY Medium of Exchange.

Prove me wrong. (Without the hand wavy gestures and knee jerking, please)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

🐉AT ₿01 5mo ago

I love how you just breeze over lightning simply because you clearly dont understand it

Gunnar Stødle 5mo ago

We gone have to rely on bitcoin banks.

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

Thank you! I have not seen this. It makes sense then my question… Trusted Third Parties are inevitable but people prefer to stay in delusion about scaling bitcoin without them.

epsql 5mo ago

Zero Knowledge rollups seem to be a promising way to achieve scale in a trustless way:

https://dba.xyz/a-bitcoin-l2-thesis/

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

Good that it is ”promising”; promising doesn’t do it for me as an explanation for the question how bitcoin could scale WITHOUT TRUSTED THIRD PARTIES though.

epsql 5mo ago

The linked article has more details if you want to do some reading

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

I have read it now and I understand that this Layer 2 is promising but presupposes changes in the functionality of the L1 (so maybe) and a continued development of the layer 2 itself. So maybe.🤷🏼‍♂️

epsql 5mo ago

The answer for this specific case is necessarily a "maybe" since it would have already been done had it been much easier to achieve.

I'm not sure what other kinds of answers you can get on the topic other than promising tech currently in development

mike 5mo ago

Explain to me how VISA, with it's IBM 3/60 and hundreds of thousands of paper receipts each day is supposed to scale to 15,000 TPS ?

Also, don't dismiss Lightning, as the other comments have said.

Also, how do the thousands of trades per second that Bitcoin exchanges process happen?

RTGS the banking Real Time Gross Settlement layer for banks is capable of handling up to 9 TPS, but rarely exceeds 5.

There are hundreds of answers across thousands of scenarios.

You have asked a multi disciplined, multi factor question as if it requires a single answer.

I've given a couple of things to think about, but VISA couldn't answer the same question in the 1970's either.

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

The usual handwavy answer; ”Technical development will take care of itself. And you are stupid. Bitcoin will fix this”

mike 5mo ago

Yes, but it is the correct answer.

Just because you don't like it or dismiss it, doesn't make it wrong.

Re-read it, it contains more depth than you have indicated you understand.

Particularly the RTGS part and the IBM 3/60 part.

Research RTGS, after a few months you should understand that Bitcoin already operates faster than banks do.

Research Lightning, after a few months you should understand Lightning operates faster than VISA / Mastercard does and it also scales faster and much greater than existing merchant service infrastructure providers.

Or do you just want to troll?

I'm something of an expert on trolling myself you know 😂

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

I have not questioned the speed of Lightning but there is not enough block space for many small non custodially produced channels. You will have to rely on LARGE channels that are open for long periods of time, and then we suddenly have Trusted Third Parties (which was my point) or have I misunderstood Lightning completely?

mike 5mo ago

Yes, you've misunderstood Lightning completely in the same way most people quote semi truths about Bitcoin that make it seem wrong or stupid.

Run a node for a while, they are easy to run and will help you understand how powerful they can be.

Also, don't forget there are paper Bitcoin options emerging now like Cashu (not the fake Bitcoin trading meaning of paper Bitcoin).

For offline communities, it is possible to have printed notes that can be exchanged infinitely before they obtain final settlement on chain, which you may never need to do.

Also mints, which are private communities. These do require trust models, but can be useful for organisations or groups where trust is already built in.

There are so many options for so many different scenarios. It's worth your while exploring them more.

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

😅I run a node, Start 9 since 2023. On the basis of this my scepticism of Lightning in its non custodial form has increased. It works NOW (and the zapps I give away comes from my node) but it will not satisfy 8 billion people using only non custodial wallets. You will have to rely on Trusted Third Parties like Wallet of Satoshi and Muun and Speed Wallet etc to even have a chance to satisfy the global population and not only a couple of hundred thousand nerds🤷🏼‍♂️

marksn 5mo ago

whats wrong with lightning? Can you explain why it wont do it?

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

Every channel is taking up blockspace, it is a transaction on the base chain, and with 220 million transactions per year you will have to rely on large channels that are open for a long time and not small and many non custodial channels . You’ll have to rely on Trusted Third Parties to provide that for you 🤷🏼‍♂️

mike 5mo ago

Your right about the first part, but you seem to indicate this is bad or a problem rather than it's a blockchain, it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do.

And no, you don't have to trust, Lightning channels are trustless.

Learn the protocol, get some experience and understand it first hand before you make statements that are that uninformed.

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

Services like Muun Wallet or Wallet of Satoshi often handle the opening, closing, and routing of Lightning channels for users. This means users rely on the provider to maintain channel liquidity, route payments correctly, and ensure funds are accessible.

And some Lightning wallets, like Wallet of Satoshi, are custodial, meaning they hold the private keys or control the funds in the Lightning channels. Users trust the provider not to steal funds or lose them due to incompetence or hacks. In other words, TRUSTED THIRD PARTIES.

There is not enough blockspace for 8 billion people opening private channels.

mike 5mo ago

Muun, WoS.

Yes, they exist, but so do child accounts with banks.

8 billion channels?

Run a node and stop going from one extreme "WoS" to another "8 billion channels".

How does VISA cope with 8 billion transactions per second?

How does HSBC handle bank accounts for 8 billion people?

Because you understand the fiat world, you understand how stupid these questions are.

It would be nearly impossible to explain how stupid these questions are to somebody that knows banks or VISA exist and are responsible for the world banking and that the world population is 8 billion.

Understand, your statements / questions in this context.

The world bank perhaps does a dozen transactions a year, your local branch does perhaps a few dozen transactions a day.

Neither worries about the 8 billion people on the planet.

If I send a lightning payment to somebody, it may route through a few other nodes, it might not, but it has no effect on the lightning network at all, neither does Cashu, neither do mints, neither do institutional transactions.

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

Do You understand my original question?

How will for example Lightning handle 8 billion people’s need for fast transactions WITHOUT TRUSTED THIRD PARTIES?

My question is not ”How will bitcoin + layer 2, layer 3 etc handle the need for 8 billion people? Because I am sure that it will be solved WITH TTPs.

You will (I’m sure of that😅) continue your smug condescending answering of questions I have not asked and then giving me advice how I shall run a node. (I run a node, Start 9 since 2023, and it is because of this I am convinced it will not scale in a non custodial way).

mike 5mo ago

Yes I'm being smug and condescending because that is the environment you set. You set the tone with your original question.

If you prefer a different environment then go ahead and change your tone and I'll change also.

I'm also being smug and condescending for all the responses you give like "handwaving".

I'm following your lead.

Also, my answers are correct whether you like them or not and your experience of running a node is extremely limited and you have built an entirely false narrative based on your very limited experience.

If you are unfamiliar with my normal style, perhaps this response to a different thread will help. Here is me flipping from being smug and condescending to helpful and very cooperative when prompted.

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp6pmv65w6tfhcp73404xuxcqpg24f8rf2z86f3v824td22c9ymptqyv8wumn8ghj7enfd36x2u3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99uq3vamnwvaz7tmgd9ehgtnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qqs0kdvyrdf5x9538l2793hxxk9wmj6jjsgqqml59zkhpnvv273zuws9se9xy

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

You have not answered my question though. Because you can’t. You make prognostications of future technological progress that may or may not come to fruition.

My prognosis is the following: Bitcoin as a MoE will be solved on layers above but mainly through TTPs. A minority of transactions will happen in a non custodial way. Thank you for the attention to this matter.

mike 5mo ago

You are definitely trolling now.

I have given you a full complete answers to every question you asked me and several others who have commented to you also.

You dismiss them with "hand wave" comments or, if you don't like the answers, you pretend that I'm not answering them.

You then repeat the same question telling me I haven't answered you.

You then tell me I'm smug and condescending in a smug and condescending manner.

You then repeat a question without acknowledging anything I've said. You're not even prepared to argue or tell me I'm wrong, you simply pretend like I haven't answered it.

That's fine, but I'm calling you out. Tell me what I've got wrong about RTGS and the IBM 3/60 scenario and Cashu and Mints and exchanges and banks.

You have to address each and every one, fully with complete acknowledgement and understanding and explain why it doesn't answer any of your questions.

Tell me why I'm wrong or accept I'm right, but don't tell me the answers I've given you don't exist.

If you are unable to complete this fully, then you're gaslighting.

marksn 5mo ago

No need for extreme large channels as the price of sats goes up it finds an equilibrium. Paying 2 sats for a coffee is a nothing burger on a medium/large channel!

So it takes a lot of pressure of the main chain.

R 5mo ago

In the 1990s I sat in briefings about how the electronic spectrum was full. We were at the limit of bandwidth and new uses for the internet were a waste of time. Today those who were questioning the limits of dial up internet would look like fools. Things get built as they are needed. There aren’t 8 billion people wanting to transact in bitcoin so your question is unanswerable. Things are being built and scaled on Bitcoin every day. Use what we have (lightning, liquid, cashu, etc) and solutions will grow with demand.

Hans Karlsborn 5mo ago

Ok. Your answer to my question ”How will bitcoin scale to serve 8 billion people’s need for transaction without Trusted Third Parties?” is:

”Future will take care of this. It is by the way a stupid question. Of course things will happen because I want them to happen”.

Thank you for your insight.