The Crypto Prophecies
TCP/IP is not Internet, it's a protocol, layer 4 is not internet, SSL/https is not internet but a secure protocol. But all of it together make it optimal method if information transfer. Bitcoin stores the value. Add-ons help optimize it. Similarly with casr, 4 wheels, motor, fuel, seats make up a car...
>but redundant securities like XRP XRP is not a security. >pre-mined to get wealthy Satoshi still holds enough Bitcoin to really harm the market if he/she/they decided to dump. >coins that all claim to do things better than TCP/IP have a finite timeline in the space. XRP isn't focused on being "better than Bitcoin", it's simply focused on fast, decentralized, low-fee payments.
You say this as if Bitcoin didn't solve the double spend without a 3rd party, actual decentralization of a monetary network, irrevocable possession of an asset for the first time in history, impenetrable and incorruptible security of transaction, creating entirely entire peer-to-peer economies (especially in 3rd world countries, incentivizing efficient energy production.... none of that. I'm sure you'll still make gains holding XRP in this bull run, but redundant securities like XRP and the 25,000 others that all claim to do things better than TCP/IP have a finite timeline in the space.
>Bitcoin is a store of value. Have you ever wondered why the Mona Lisa is valued in millions of dollars? It's not just about its beauty; it's because Leonardo da Vinci is no longer alive to create another. A fixed supply is the key to storing value. Bitcoin, like the Mona Lisa, is even better because it's divisible, highly portable, and easily securable. This is a fine thought, and actually quite an advanced understanding of digital scarcity. > Bitcoin is also a store of energy. Consider the wealth of Middle Eastern countries with oil reserves; oil stores energy and is transportable. While some nations have vast energy reserves, not all forms are easily transportable. Bitcoin mining, however, solves this issue. For instance, El Salvador mines Bitcoin using geothermal power, making the energy transportable within minutes worldwide. This is where I disagree. You can't "get back" the energy you consumed mining Bitcoin, so it is a rather bad store of energy. It can be a proxy of energy consumption, assuming someone will be willing to pay you for that spent energy down the road. >Moreover, Bitcoin is anti-war. Major wars often lead to high inflation because governments can't fund wars with sound money due to its fixed supply. While human conflicts may persist, a Bitcoin-based economy can help prevent the escalation of wars. Sure? But houses are also anti-war, because they react to inflation as well and governments can't fund wars while making housing less affordable too. They can, and they will for Bitcoin. It will just be "one more devaluation, promise!" ​ >Bitcoin is impartial and resistant to control. Unlike political currencies controlled by governments and influential individuals, Bitcoin adheres strictly to its core principles, regardless of the amount owned by any individual. Agreed, spot-on points. I like to think of Bitcoin as "the most neutral asset we've ever had" >In a Bitcoin economy, there's no need for wealth managers, banks, or employees handling money. With Bitcoin, you work, store, and spend—eliminating the need for excessive human involvement in preserving wealth. This is just wrong. There will always be people to facilitate things. Just look at the internet via TCP/IP, two essential open protocols. They still need people to manage, build, fix, adjust, and override things constantly. >Furthermore, Bitcoin promotes innovation. In a world dominated by sound money, people focus on essential needs rather than flashy items. Earning Bitcoin requires innovation and creating genuine value through products, driving continuous progress. Agreed! And it being open source and heavily decentralized is what makes it awesome :)
A centralized entity created XRP for the purpose of profiting as a business. That's all I need to know to stay away from something in this space. That holds no value to me. I used to be very pro-ADA and I look back on how lost I was years ago. Payments don't need to be solved. its like trying to come out with another protocol after TCP/IP was already established. Bitcoin is already TCP/IP.
Cardano is not some kind of rebel army and wants to promote business but that doesn't mean you have you to discriminate users and honesty, reasonability, goes a long way. Look at its chain governance ideas for example. What you don't want is < 1% of people deciding the faith of, for example, Bitcoin or Ethereums entire ecosystem. But equal participation in what is relevant. For the same reason you don't implement one party that gets to "MEV" and packet-intrude or reshape TCP/IP or UDP. Or telling planet earth how and what the internet should be used for. It's a different philosophy.
Imagine a non-techy CNBC host from 1999 asking a Microsoft developer how they're ever going to get high-speed video streaming for billions of devices simultaneously using TCP/IP and IPV-4. Bitcoin can scale, without giving up decentralization and security on the base chain like BCH has done. Just give it time. We are in this for the long haul... not for a quick fiat dollar. That's why Bitcoin is NOT cRypTo
99.99% of all crypto will go to zero. After years of trading alts I, like most others, understand that there is only Bitcoin. Can you make great gains without Bitcoin? Sure. Is there infinitely higher risk? Yes. There are 2 concepts that make coins trash in the long run: 1. If they are centralized (ETH, SOL, XRP literally any coin created by a single company for the goal of profits will likely be centralized) 2. If they are pre-mined (any authority of a project who gives out free coins inside it's company to pay people) If you apply those 2 to all crypto, Bitcoin is really the only actual value over time. its the TCP/IP of crypto. Whether people want to admit it or not, its already the winner.
The problem is people don't want to understand it so no matter what you tell them they ignore it. They'll get BTC at the price they deserve due to their ignorance. Most people don't understand servers And TCP/IP or SSL protocols but they don't believe the Internet is fake at this point. Same thing with eventually happen with BTC.
>Things get displaced all the time I understand that, this is very true. ​ >Never did I say that I could come up with it but doesn't mean someone else can't. Oh it could be anybody, that's not the point. The point is, assuming somebody came up with some tech that really offered new technological advantage over the bitcoin protocol, bitcoin would be improved (by consensus) with that new idea, not replaced. ​ >Many things popular in 2000 are no longer popular, COULD happen to Bitcoin as well. This is true of course, but bitcoin is first and foremost a **protocol**, not a social media platform or ecommerce site or gadget that people will discard and replace. Consider for example TCP/IP. As a protocol with a wide and deep "network effect" think about what it would take to "displace" TCP/IP as the backbone of the internet today. Improvements can certainly be made to augment the protocol (bitcoin) as new and valuable ideas are invented, but displacing it with something all together new? Very unlikely. Consider as well that "something new coming along" means centralization and leadership. If the idea were that good, bitcoin would integrate the idea, not just give up on 14 years of value accretion in favor of switching over to some new centralized sh\*tcoin.
I’m not here to promote or shill anything but you should look into that coin that launched CCIP it’s the equivalent of TCP/IP of the internet Full disclosure I hold BTC since 2016 and still stacking sats I just started buying that “other one” cause of the problem it’s solving
I think you may be very, very right. Look at Internet/Interweb adoption versus Bitcoin. That 's been going for 50 years (from 1973 when Vince Cerf invented TCP to today. Bitcoin started in 2008/9 and Lightning in 2016 (I think), and after almost 15 years we're about twice as far along as was Interwebz. Sure, these things tooks "decades or centuries" with physical stuff like gold. I bet we will see massive changes in decades or maybe even just years.
\> There is no standard for money, money is whatever we choose it is. I think you may have these the wrong way around. When we choose money (wampum, rai, or whatever), then our choice becomes the standrd for money. I was working for DEC in the late 80s, and I remember the Protocol Wars. I remember DECnet getting squeezed out by TCP/IP, and the way Matthew Kratter describes it in the video is exactly what happened. I disagree with your contentions; I think Capital B Bitcoin ***is*** a protocol. It is a way of communicating value according to standards and a specified ruleset, and that makes it a protocol. You go on to say "here is no store of value, because what is that value? " I work for x hours, I get paid y sats (rather than z dollars). The value of my labor has been stored. You also talk about houses and cars. These are not (or should not be) stores of value. They are consumer goods. Agreed, my third or fourth house that I rent out are stores of value, but not my primary residence. It has only become so, because there's nowhere else for your average Joe to store walth that won't get debased. Case in point: my parents bought the house I'm living in today for the equivalent of 280 ounces of gold. Today, it's worth 280 ounces of gold. Last point. Dunno for certatin, but I think the 'scam' business is arounf the fact that every crypto is a security, but Bitcoin is not.
No you make a fair point, and it’s a question I used to ask myself a lot. [This is a pretty good video](https://youtu.be/kfSJQmAYNAs?si=yLI4mL1Z3uC9XUZX) on the topic, and compares bitcoin to the internet protocol wars that took place between the 70s and 90s. Obviously there was one protocol that won the race and that was TCP/IP, which is where the internet got its name and is the standardised protocol used by all computers today. Bitcoin is the TCP/IP of money essentially.
Believe me I wish I could go back years and years ago with a Bitcoin only approach from the start. I've read Mastering, all 3 of Safes books, Inventing Bitcoin, Book of Satoshi, a few hundred Bitcoin Audible readings... there's hundreds more still Open to another suggestions people have on Bitcoin. Not interested in pre-mined, POS coins. I'm just not interested at all sorry. BTC is the TCP/IP already.
Yes you can directly onboard to L2 from most popular exchanges. I agree that currently L2s are a bit inconvenient but I also think a lot of this is growing pains and will be abstracted away over time. Someone a decade from now will be using an app with smart contracts helping to facilitate some (or all) of the backend and won't even know what a layer two is. Your average internet user thinks about TCP/IP 0 times throughout their day, technologists will abstract away difficulty over time regardless of the medium of tech. If we were to stick with the internet analogy I'd say we're in the early to mid 90's at best UX wise right now. The internet pre search engines was a nightmare to use and navigate.
TCP/IP is dated too. How is ETH being outpreformed? Tell me about another L1 with smart contract functionality that isn't sacrificing decentralization for scaling. How does JP Morgan owning ETH undermine the EVM? Blackrock owns bitcoin.
You said in a different reply that the command contained the following (Bitcoin Core must be running first): TCP 127.0.0.1:8333 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING TCP \[::1\]:8333 \[::\]:0 LISTENING If possible, I would now try step 3 (telnet) from a different computer on your local network. That would give you the most information.
[In 1983 ARPNET switched over to TCP/IP](https://www.webfx.com/blog/web-design/the-history-of-the-internet-in-a-nutshell/) While TCP/IP was invented well before that it didn't become the standard for everybody until much later I'm still waiting for Lightening, at this point the crypto version of TCP/IP (though not as far reaching). Coinbase only just a few days ago said they will. Considering the state of their customer service, I will take that as "the check is in the mail"
Its the first trustless and incorruptible medium of exchange and store of value in human history. Computer science will only get your understanding so far. It's more about understanding the history of money and how we got here, then understanding how bitcoin's principles are far better than any money we have ever had on this planet. Important to understand Bitcoin was not the first cryptocurrency. It's 50 years worth of economics, finance, politics, human rights, philosophy, mathematics and physics all rolled into a perfect balance of principles with absolute scarcity being the most important. if you change one thing about bitcoin, you sacrifice functionality of another aspect. This is why trying to create "better" coins is a fools errand. Bitcoin is the TCP/IP or the protocol wars and whether people want to admit it or not, its already won the cryptocurrency wars.
furtheron the bill gates fuly switched house used of course , as still nowadays , MAC adressing , aside of the TCP stacks. so we constitue allready two different ways of communicaation with the applications in the ho.use . there is a simplified description available of how it does what its doing . on the on hand of course the question : semiconductor . thats grounding . then we have the really helpful RFC arcives : TCP for example is a very useful entrypoint , remote conection . in the end we will assumably come to some descriptive models , for example the OSI 7 layers model . ofcourse thats all old boys stylish school , nowadays semiconductors have abilities not known in the late 50ds , eatly 60s. how come , you have a 7 core processor ? even within your phone ? and on a mobil switch network ? with the abbility to command in human language ? taking streamed films ? and do on
Heres some links for you, understanding the internet and understanding hard money will help fuel your understanding of bitcoin. Get your set of balls, were going in. https://youtu.be/mII9NZ8MMVM?si=dRKI6d2TlgJwZgSf https://youtu.be/rc744Z9IjhY?si=r-ktN1aodSXCJP2F https://youtu.be/15beIVhFqX4?si=LVALcj8uHcf8k9v6 The internet is built of protocols, and that’s exactly what bitcoin is. What is the internet? In·ter·net /ˈin(t)ərˌnet/ noun 1. a global computer network providing a variety of information and communication facilities, consisting of interconnected networks using standardized communication protocols. What is a protocol? a protocol is a set of rules for formatting and processing data. Network protocols are like a common language for computers. The computers within a network may use vastly different software and hardware; however, the use of protocols enables them to communicate with each other regardless. What are the most used protocols for the internet? Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol TCP/IP Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol. It is a suite of communication protocols used to interconnect network devices on the internet. TCP/IP is also used as a communications protocol in a private computer network (an intranet or extranet). File Transfer Protocol (FTP) FTP is a client-server protocol, with which a client requests a file and the server supplies it. FTP runs over TCP/IP -- a suite of communications protocols -- and requires a command channel and a data channel to communicate and exchange files, respectively. Clients request files through the command channel and receive access to download, edit and copy the file, among other actions, through the data channel. Internet Protocol (IP) IP functions similarly to a postal service. When users send and receive data from their device, the data gets spliced into packets. Packets are like letters with two IP addresses: one for the sender and one for the recipient. After the packet leaves the sender, it goes to a gateway, like a post office, that directs it in the proper direction. Packets continue to travel through gateways until they reach their destinations. Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) SMTP is the most popular email protocol, is part of the TCP/IP suite and controls how email clients send users' email messages. Email servers use SMTP to send email messages from the client to the email server to the receiving email server. However, SMTP doesn't control how email clients receive messages -- just how clients send messages. Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) HTTP is a file sharing protocol that runs over TCP/IP. But HTTP primarily works over web browsers and is commonly recognizable for most users. When a user enters a website domain and aims to access it, HTTP provides the access. HTTP connects to the domain's server and requests the site's HTML, which is the code that structures and displays the page's design. Ethernet Ethernet is a protocol that allows computers (from servers to laptops) to talk to each other over wired networks that use devices like routers, switches and hubs to direct traffic. Ethernet works seamlessly with wireless protocols, too. other important protocols not mentioned here: DNS DHCP POP3 IPv4 OSPF 802.11 (wifi) Bitcoin Value transfer P2P protocol, decentralized flat network, all clients, no servers. Circumvents the need for banks or intermediaries. “the internet of money”
Took me 3 years to understand that Bitcoin is completely in its own category. Bitcoin is an equal playfield and has no issuer. Its a commodity just like if you bought gold, wheat, lithium, whatever. Anyone can buy it, anyone can mine it, anyone can own it Anything pre-mined or centralized is pure garbage and that is basically everything but a few coins that are rip offs of BTC. People may be making money off centralized shitcoins now, but the longer this space is around, the more and more people who will realize that BTC is literally the TCP/IP of cryptocurrency. Bitcoin was not the first crypto, it took close to 50 years of economic, philosophical, political, financial and human rights based principle to create. It was ran for the first few years at a completely venerable state by an anonymous person(s) who took no profits for maintaining. Research the protocol wars for the internet because its going to play out the same way. it already basically has. Bitcoin has literally already won and the more you learn, the greater conviction gets for everyone with the ability to see it.
Chainlink is literally going to be the next TCP IP that connects private and public blockchain. CCIP will be the standard that connects all these siloed networks and allows them to freely communicate. LINK itself is the gas that makes this happen. You are nowhere near bullish enough.
Its great to look back and understand BTC was not the first like everyone says; its the chosen one though! Bitcoin has already won in every sense of the word Its the TCP/IP of digital money. People should all be familiar with the "protocol wars" and how that ended up. I see Bitcoin in the same light.
Bitcoin is so much more than Gold. I look at Bitcoin like I do at TCP/IP. It has the potential to be the base financial protocol for Gold, treasuries, currencies, real estate, art, and most any other ownership. But even if it’s just used as a value store (which is like saying the internet is only used for email), Gold as a comparison is still weak. Bitcoin is portable, frictionless, borderless and ubiquitous. Gold only meets some of those capabilities. As global markets wake up to its true value proposition, I don’t think 20x is difficult to reach.
Amazon is a website built on top of a protocol (internet, TCP/IP), a better comparison would be to compare bitcoin protocol to the internet protocol which was developed in 1974. Many layers of development on top of TCP/IP before Amazon as we know it today.
I believe Bitcoin is in its infancy. The potential of Bitcoin is like the potential of TCP/IP. Did we stop at Email as the only thing the internet was good for? Why stop at gold when talking about Bitcoin? We aren’t good bugs, we are future builders.
> But if they stop developing on it and upgrading it then it’s exactly the same as a bank. It will just become old and outdated and eventually fail. Fortunately, there is a financial motivation to upgrade (if needed at all). TCP/IP is maintained and it's paying no one anything.
The mistake people make is thinking cryptos value is in being a currency. Its not. Thats why i personally dont have bitcoin since its only use is as a currency/store of value. I dont need a risky store of value and i dont see a future as a currency. The value for me from crypto comes from smart contracts and programmability. This is something unique that gives lots of new finance functions. I can see a crypto with smart contracts becoming a layer behind apps. So people are using crypto without even knowing it. Crypto in its current form isnt useable for the masses because its way to difficult. Once its used as a protocoll like HTTP or TCP/IP without people even knowing it. Thats when the real value comes in and mass adoption (without people even knowing) will happen.
ETH is tech, not money. It is like saying TCP/IP is the future of money. ETH is an inflationary, painful, expensive centralized technology. As money, it would be worse than using fiat currency. Inflationary and has an infinite supply. It is questionable whether ETH will even be the preferred layer 1 for tech since literally every other layer 1 is better than it is. ETH was the first smart contract platform, sure, but it is far from determined whether it will be the #1 layer 1 and the notion of it as money is clown world.
More seriously, I did take the time to read the article, and I think there may be a mis-communication over the word Internet. I remember looking into this in sone depth a while ago, when I designed networking for Digital Equipment. TL;DR internet is a way of messaging, not a thing that gets turned on and off. Essentially, the Internet is a protocol - an agreed-upon way of messaging - using packets of data moved from source to destination. The rules are called Internet Protocol and Transmission Control Protocol. The rules don't care *how* the packets are carried: radio, lasercable, copper or pigeon, it's all the same to TCP/IP. The Bitcoin network is an application-layer network running on top of the Internet layer. The Internet *literally* cannot stop working. It is the set of rules built into every router, every one of the billions of pieces of hardware across the globe that sends or receives packets of data to another. This is how every Bitcoin node knows how to find every other node. The Bitcoin blockchain exists in many copies distributed across the Internet. Bitcoin couldn't exist without Internet, to the same degree that Internet couldn't exist without electricity. That means *the network* is Bitcoin, not an individual transaction or computer or communication link. There's no single thing you can point to and say, pull that plug, no more Bitcoin. To split the Bitcoin network apart would require splitting the Internet apart. Could it be done? China tried the hardest ten years ago, with the Great Firewall, but that was porous. Today? I very much doubt it. I think the degree of global interconnectivity is just too much. I might be wrong, of course.
I actually have, and didn't find that to be the case. But, I suppose it somewhat depends on the place. Sure, if you're in a highly technical or skilled job, you'll find less unintelligent people. But, IRL, I haven't run across all that many unintelligent people, to be honest. Lots of unwise or distracted people, but capable if they grew up or actually tried. I remember when the Internet was new, and I had to go to people's homes and businesses to install TCP/IP on their computers so they could get online. Some of them were doctors and lawyers. Now, almost everyone is online. The tech will get a lot easier. And, with something as serious as money, people will learn to handle it properly. It's just so early yet. (See, it isn't just a meme.)
.. in addition to my earlier reply. To answer it in another way than the "everything else is a centralized pump and dump" analogy. It would also be possible for somebody to develop some new, better protocol that does everything that Bitcoin does (and more) and release it anonymously to the world just as Satoshi did, without any pre-mine or ICOs, and then simply choose to disappear and hope their revolutionary white paper is read, and spread in an organic and unforced way just as happened with Bitcoin. But there are a couple problems with this. The "cat is out of the bag" so to speak when it comes to understanding and appreciating decentralized, scarce digital assets secured by hash-power at scale. (which is an aspect of Satoshi's release that can't be repeated - everybody knows about it already) So it would be a question of who would adopt this new protocol, why, and *how*? Bitcoin has a huge "first mover network effect" supporting it and increasing technology being built upon it. It does exactly what it needs to do and has been refined and hardened. So but what if Bitcoiners world wide - miners, you, I, everyone with a vested interest in it, eventually get their eyes on this new protocol and realize "gee, at scale, this new protocol / chain would offer the same value proposition as our beloved bitcoin but better!" Would they simply stop running bitcoin and instead start fresh with this new protocol and chain? I suspect no, rather, they'd just steal the good ideas from this new anonymous protocol and form a consensus to implement those features within Bitcoin. Once a protocol takes hold and things are built on top of it, they are improved upon, but rarely get replaced. Think of TCP/IP as the backbone protocol of the internet. Imagine the globally applicable incentives that would be required to get the world to replace it today. Possible? Yes. Probable? No.
Clarifying your position on the same topic 😁. That’s what that’s called. You should read more it will help with your comprehension. And if you don’t think we haven’t corrupted TCP/IP then you’re simply uninformed. Internet companies are monopolies. Try starting a new one…get the permits and licensing to build new towers. You can’t. Bureaucracy and regulatory agencies at their best! Corruption. Plain and simple. When Bitcoin is compromised it will be via hard fork or many soft forks introducing some method for manipulation or centralized authority…often brought about by an abuse of power somewhere by someone, or in response to a disaster of some massive proportions. Being pro bitcoin I don’t want to see this happen and I hope it works forever true to the ideology that was in mind when it was built. But I also recognize that Bitcoin does not fix the fundamental problem of man’s depravity. And we will, like we always do, find some way to corrupt it. But again the weak point in bitcoin is us. Left to its own devices unchanged as it is right now bitcoin would be amazing for the future but it will change. Like everything does.
A couple of points - you're assuming that there are no rewards or consequences, but both of those assumptions are wrong: 1. Nano has incentives for good behavior - the network itself is the incentive (0 fee, permission-less, money). Just like HTTP, SMTP, TCP/IP, and even Bitcoin full nodes, none of which pay people fees at the protocol-level. The largest entities are the least likely to attack, since they make or save money from using the network 2. Nano uses ORV, which is very different from PoS, with different game theory (more details [here](https://docs.nano.org/protocol-design/orv-consensus/#open-representative-voting-orv-vs-proof-of-stake-pos)). There is no leader selection, block producers, fee rewards, or block rewards. You get no special privileges for being a consensus participant (representative), so there's no reason to do so unless you want to use the network itself. This also means that decentralization is incentivized - there's no benefit to having massive representatives, only downsides (increased attack/censorship risk), and that's why Nano keeps getting more decentralized over time (opposite of Bitcoin) 3. There ARE consequences for bad behavior in Nano. For censorship, the bad attackers can easily end up forking themselves out and losing access to wallets, users, services, etc, when the quorum thresholds and/or voting weight gets adjusted (due to the block-lattice data structure combined with block cementing). For double spend attempts, the attackers would just get forked out, also losing the wallets, users, services, etc, and destroying the value of their double spent version 4. We have seen multiple examples of old/dead PoW coins getting double spent (ETC, BTG, VTC, etc), and almost 0 examples of PoS coins getting double spent, *[even when the coin is almost dead](https://twitter.com/patrickluberus/status/1703752678839308573)* (no users/volume), **because** the game theory works* - the largest entities have the biggest incentive not to attack the network (they'd destroy the value of their holdings), AND no attacker is going to buy up the supply to attempt an attack 5. Nano is one of the [most decentralized networks](https://nanocharts.info/p/01/vote-weight-distribution) already, and keeps getting more decentralized with time, especially compared to [Bitcoin](https://btc.com/stats/pool)
No one knows the answer to that any more than someone could predict web 2.0 adoption in the 2000's happening from the perspective of asking how changes to TCP/IP or HTTP are going to get the masses on board in 1992. You're asking the wrong questions and missing the big picture.
Can something be really "hidden" in a transparent network? Sounds contradictory. The mistake many people make: They look at blockchain and act like its something normal users will be directly interacting with in the future. It's like saying the internet is complicated because protocols like UDP and TCP are complicated.
It’s the network effects. It’s not about “better”; it’s about what’s most widely used. There’s been tens of thousands of attempts to make a better bitcoin, all of which have failed/are failing. TCP/IP is not the “best” internet protocol. It’s just the one that caught on. Beta was better than VHS, but VHS became the adopted standard. There’s many examples like this in technology. Bitcoin is a social consensus. In many ways, it’s more like a language than it is a technology. Not only network effects, also the difficulty of creating a new decentralized network. The jig is up. It can’t be done in a truly decentralized way anymore. It requires too many resources, and those resources would have to be taken from bitcoin. Why would developers volunteer to build it? Why would would people put money into some small project that will likely never catch bitcoin? Again, we have tens of thousands of examples to show that they do not. You don’t understand bitcoin as well as you think you do. I heard these same questions in 2014, when it was slightly more relevant, but by now, the evidence is overwhelming. It’s not going to happen, at least not for centuries.
Summary: Saying "the Internet goes down" is like saying, "the street goes down" and suddenly nobody in the world can drive anywhere. ---------------------------- Details: First, there were computers. The only way for computers to "communicate" with each other was via boxes of punch cards or magnetic tapes. People figured out how get two computers to communicate over wires. Eventually, they figured out how to have several computers in the same room/building communicate over a "network". Local Area Networks were born. After a while, there were many Local Area Networks (LANs) around the globe. People figured out how to allow a computer on one LAN communicate with another computer on a different LAN. This "thing" which connects networks (LANs) to other networks is what we now call the Internet. The Internet is based upon carefully designed protocols: IP, TCP, ARP, and so on. There is no "one thing" to go down. There are millions of computers cooperating to implement the Internet Protocol and a great many connections between the Internet routers. Saying "the Internet goes down" is like saying, "the street goes down" and suddenly nobody in the world can drive anywhere.
So there is TCP and UDP which are 2 methods of moving a payload across a network. TCP is a smooth steady stream of packets that come with a packing list that will let you know what order they should be in. So with TCP you can say hey sender missing packet 4 plz resend thx. UDP is faster but is not for critical things that require a constant or guaranteed connection. A good example is video calling goes over UDP and that's why it'll stutter because when a frame of video is missing it's never resent and UDP gives zero fucks if you got your whole payload.
Blockchain itself is a type of communication protocol. All of this shit already runs on top of TCP/IP. It really takes a stretch to claim they are analogous. I'm not being dumb. I would argue that the people pushing this forced analogy are, though.
***Technical history note: *** I was programming a 360 in Assember in 1973, and that was the year TCP/IP originated (Kahn & Cerf). Yes, I'm *that* old. By 1983, I had bought a 256KB IBM PC for $7,600 in '83 dollars, and by '86 had my house hooked to the Internet (I think there were about 2 or 3 thousand houses connected at that time in a city of about 600,000 people). You might think of that time as the Bitcoin years (equivalent). The first version of HTML was written in 1993. That led to the World Wide Web, and almost no-one interacted with the base Internet layer again. (Apart from geeks who like packet-sniffing with Ethereal and Wireshark, of course.) I think of this time as the same as the beginning of the time of Lightning. So where are we today? I think it's the equivalent to 1996, with Netscape just released. About 15% of US adults had some sort of Internet access; but only 2% had a fast 28.8 **kilobit modem**. These are early days. We're *just* beginning to go up the parabolic S adoption curve. Start of Internet to today took 50 years. Bitcoin might cover that distance in half that time. Don't forget 86% of the world's population today owns a smartphone, and is, by definition, already networked. My best guess is that the Bitcoin world in 2030 will look as advanced as The Interwebz in 2010 . . . and that's pretty darn close to where we are at today. Only difference I seen in the last fifteen years have been incremental (like AJAX, for example) or cosmetic (like Bootstrap). I don't think adoption will have any technical issues; the real constraints will be people, as always.
What you’re missing is the fact that Bitcoin is a new monetary technology that is totally separate from the fiat money system, which is already so engrained into society. Even if Bitcoin was just some other really great networked technology that wasn’t supplanting an entrenched societal standard, it would still take many years for global adoption to really catch on. Our modern version of TC/IP was more or less finished in the early 80’s, and yet the internet didn’t really become popular among normal people until the late 90s and 2000s. It wasn’t until the late 2000s that it was becoming quite obvious to everybody how useful the internet was and still is. It took TCP/IP about 20 years, and that was with a human-readable messaging system (email—SMTP, POP, IMAP protocols) present from the very early years, early to mid 80’s. We only got LNURL Lightning addresses just a few years ago, before that Bitcoin was still quite technically challenging and foreign, even for techies. So, combine those things in your mind—an entrenched societal standard (fiat) has to be overcome, inherent limitations in the growth of a network technology, challenging and largely unfinished protocols… … as the guy who’s made the chart of Bitcoin adoption vs TCP/IP adoption, I’m now wondering if it is more appropriate to set the starting date of the comparison to an even earlier year, before TCP/IP was mostly finalized in 1982. There were earlier versions of computer communications protocols even before then, and the TCP/IP protocol I’m sure was drafted probably in the 70s. It might actually be the case that Bitcoin adoption in 2023 is most appropriately compared to the adoption of the internet in, say, 1983, 14 years after ARPANET had two nodes on the network.
there are at least two layers regarding privacy when interacting with web3/blockchains TL;DR: TCP/IP: use Tor on-chain: you will be tracked anyway if you get targeted, unless you use non-KYC platforms and you don't use bank account/debit card to buy
> When you have trillions flowing through it, how is it not like TCP/IP for blockchains? Congratulations, this is the most asinine thing I've read on the Internet today. It's a strained analogy at best, but if you really want to make the comparison, then the blockchain equivalent of TCP/IP would be the base layer blockchains themselves, because TCP/IP is practically synonymous with the Internet itself. It's a silly analogy to begin with, and it should be a huge red flag for anybody hearing about LINK for the first time. It does *not* lend credibility to a project, to breathlessly claim that it's the biggest thing since the invention of the Internet.
TCP/IP are protocols for data transfers Chainlinks oracle networks are essentially data feeds that bring information from off chain and puts it on-chain. CCIP uses the same DON to connect these chains. When you have trillions flowing through it, how is it not like TCP/IP? Every blockchain needs an oracle and chainlink is the biggest. Are you missing something?
tldr; Ethereum is predicted to become the dominant blockchain platform, with other blockchains eventually becoming Ethereum Layer 2. This consolidation is similar to how the networking industry converged upon a single global standard, TCP/IP. The value of interconnection between specialized networks is the ability to flow products and services from one ecosystem to another. While there will always be multiple networks, having Ethereum as a binding Layer 1 offers significant benefits. However, this consolidation may result in less variability in network functions and require tokens and smart contracts to be the same everywhere. Specialized blockchains may soon become obsolete. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
tldr; Ethereum is predicted to become the dominant blockchain, with other blockchains eventually becoming Ethereum Layer 2. This consolidation is similar to how the networking industry converged upon a single global standard, TCP/IP. The value of interconnection between specialized networks is emphasized, as Ethereum as a binding Layer 1 can offer significant benefits. However, this consolidation may lead to less variability in network functions and the need for tokens and smart contracts to be the same everywhere. Despite this, universal infrastructure tends to be more successful than specialized infrastructure. Therefore, it is expected that specialized blockchains will soon become a thing of the past. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.