By CCN: Adamant Capital’s Tuur Demeester, an outspoken crypto analyst and proponent of Bitcoin, said on Twitter that using the flagship cryptocurrency’s blockchain will eventually be as expensive – and rare – as chartering an oil tanker.
Even the simple act of opening a Lightning Network channel will be cost-prohibitive and potentially slow once the network user base climbs into the billions.
At full maturity, using the Bitcoin blockchain will be as rare and specialized as chartering an oil tanker. https://t.co/lu1ORzrTjF
— Tuur Demeester (@TuurDemeester) May 29, 2019
Demeester then backed off his original statement a little and qualified it by saying he was talking about a situation where the majority of the world is using Bitcoin – which, of course, is what many bulls anticipate will happen.
In such a scenario, the demand for limited block space will skyrocket. On-chain scaling will eventually have to be considered, many assume. Even some “small blockers” admit that ultimately, the amount of transactions in each block has to increase. In other words, Bitcoin needs to become more efficient.
A few notes given the backlash. This statement assumed:
– Billions of Bitcoin users
– Ossification of Bitcoin Core, i.e. no further on-chain scaling
As neither is a given, I should have said "may" instead of "will". https://t.co/HSsOEo0Ncl
— Tuur Demeester (@TuurDemeester) May 30, 2019
Even opening individual lightning channels would take years for 7b+ people. Bitcoin block chain is the reserve asset and ultimate settlement of a new finance system. Direct use will be ridiculously expensive and that is ok.
— Tamas Blummer (@TamasBlummer) May 29, 2019
Bitcoin can act as a gateway drug for new crypto users, but if they’re going to stay, they’ll have to find the systems usable. At scale, even full Lightning adoption could prove expensive for the average user to afford. Rather than opening their own “payment channels,” as expected, most people would utilize a third-party service.
Does this lead to increased centralization? It’s a question of cost versus convenience.