TCP

rgnet1

You took the maxi joke too literally. Bitcoin is a simple protocol with a singular focus and it can only be invented once. TCP/IP was the network protocol developed to stay simple, stay focused, get packets to their destination. Both are good enough, widely deployed, and extremely secure. The trifecta that means fragmentation and competition are actually bad. Competing network protocols would make interoperability between Internet machines full of friction and hurt the usability of the Net overall. "Crypto" is the same -- humans created competing protocols for their own personal gain, not for the goal of making one consensus-governed global monetary system. For someone "allergic to cultism" you sure like using highly hyperbolic statements like, "Bitcoin is THE LEAST quantum secure cryptocurrency" and "consensus protocol has a fundamental long-term economic security design flaw". Good luck quantifying the first statement and the second is merely opinion and unprovable. Fact: Bitcoin is more secure than any other crypto by way of its magnitudes larger decentralized governance. It cannot be controlled by any entity. Fact: The quantum vulnerabilities -- currently highly theoretical and with what most experts agree is a decades long timeline for the threat to materialize -- still only impact a segment of coins. If those coins aren't moved, it's because they were already lost by their owners. (Why else would they not get moved?) Even if the current market price is based on a total supply of, say, 12 million "safe" coins, by the time the "rediscovered" coins are compromised, the new coins re-entering supply will get priced in at a far higher amount than what bitcoin's priced today.

rgnet1

People who coined the term "Bitcoin Maxi" have one motive - to shill other coins. I'm also an Oxygen Maxi, Electricity Maxi, and a TCP/IP Maxi. Bitcoin is the only infrastructure needed for a middleman-free, permissionless payment system that's impossible to debase or freeze. Same as I don't need 1,000 different network protocols or 1,000 different electricity vendors running cable underneath public streets.

Major-Rabbit1252

Strongly disagree. Institutions already use networks they don’t fully control all the time. The entire internet runs on open standards nobody owns. Email, TCP/IP, and countless other protocols are “public,” yet banks, governments, and huge corporations rely on them every second. Ethereum is similar in that sense. It gives institutions a neutral settlement layer they don’t have to trust a competitor to run. Building their own chain sounds good on paper, but most private chains end up being expensive, isolated, and lacking the security and decentralization that make a global network useful in the first place. A government chain only solves government needs. Corporations aren’t going to hand over all their settlement data to a government-run chain when they can use a public one that’s battle-tested, transparent, and secured by tens of billions in hardware and capital. That neutrality is the point. And we’re already seeing institutions opt in to public networks: BlackRock tokenizing assets on Ethereum, major banks experimenting with public chain settlement, and global payment providers testing stablecoins on open networks. If “no institution” would use ETH, we wouldn’t be seeing that. Private chains are great for internal stuff, but when you need global liquidity, composability, and interoperability, a public chain is the only thing that actually works.

Agitated-Bird-4333

While banks' preference for stablecoins does introduce competition that could cap XRP's explosive growth in certain enterprise channels, it doesn't spell doom for price appreciation.  The stablecoin shift is more of a mixed bag: it risks diluting XRP's direct utility in RippleNet flows, but it also amplifies XRP's role as the underlying "gas" and bridge asset on the XRPL.   RippleNet wouldn't "replace" SWIFT outright—it's more likely a complement, with hybrids (e.g., SWIFT messaging + Ripple settlement) dominating by 2026 via ISO 20022 alignment. Banks would flock to stablecoins for 70-80% of flows, prioritizing stability over XRP's raw speed. That’s true.  But XRP endures as the "neutral rail" for interoperability, especially as bank stablecoins proliferate—think of it as the internet's TCP/IP under proprietary apps. Ripple's pivot to RLUSD underscores this: stablecoins for the masses, XRP for the plumbing. Stablecoins temper XRP's "replace SWIFT overnight" narrative, making $100+ dreams unrealistic without massive global buy-in. But with ETFs live, RLUSD as a feeder, and post-SEC clarity, appreciation looks probable at 20–30% annually through 2030.   It's not "to the moon," but it's a far cry from stagnation; XRP's plumbing role in a stablecoin world could make it the quiet winner.

rgnet1

Bitcoin is a protocol, like TCP/IP, built for single-purpose behavior. TCP/IP knows nothing other than where the traffic is going. The packet hops between nodes until it gets to its destination or eventually times out after too many hops. Layers on top of TCP/IP (e.g. HTTP) have more information and more rules; they can achieve more but also be exploited. The simplicity is what makes bitcoin so secure and why we’ve seen countless events with ETH smart contracts having bugs or exploits, along with every other scamcoin. This is a problem with wallet software, not Bitcoin, which anyone can create (badly). The OP provides no working link so we have no info on what wallet was used. The Bitcoin Core wallet and other reputable wallets have safeguards to prevent obviously high fees - they require users to ignore warnings or set custom fees.

ecnecn

I still have a hard time to understand the relationship between a new internet protocol (for whatever reason you need a new protocol) and a cryptocoin named after that protocol... to me it is like trading a coin named HTTP, TCP, IP etc..

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The article discusses the importance of code neutrality in blockchain technology as the next standard for ensuring trust, resilience, and long-term adoption in global finance. It argues that blockchain systems must avoid single points of control and proprietary ownership, emphasizing open, transparent, and collectively owned protocols similar to internet standards like TCP/IP. Code neutrality ensures decentralization, regulatory clarity, and institutional confidence, enabling blockchain to support innovation and manage assets at scale. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

anon-187101

> don't even know what the OSI model is No one does, because no one uses it. They use TCP/IP instead. Winner-take-all, just like Bitcoin which is MoIP. One day you'll get it. Or not. Couldn't care less. 👋

panthar1

\>>The internet relies on 1 protocol for the transmission of packets, and that is TCP/IP. Lol. You have no idea what your even talking about. For starters, your "1 protocol" is not even accurate, TCP/IP is not a single protocol, in fact it encompasses many other protocols, including UDP, ICMP, ARP, more than the name implies. Maybe you should study the OSI model before claiming to be an expert. \>>Bitcoin's L2s will do everything else, including all the things that shitcoiners think is "game-changing". I never said bitcoin can't do smart contracts, or scale on L2's, but, one thing for sure, other chains do it better as of now, just like how UDP is better for games than TCP is. Keep thinking people are going to abandon these other projects. Alt coins have existed for a very long time, and they only growing, not decreasing in number. Free market will dictate which have better use cases, just like the stock market dictates the fate of companies. I am confident bitcoin will stay #1 for now, but it's still not a coin that can do everything the best. Keep dreaming.

paxwax2018

Claiming TCP/IP? Sure.

SpendHefty6066

Agree with OP. Why limit the innovation to money? Where would it end? Would AI invent it's own competing TCP/IP, DNS, HTTP(S) protocols? And in turn invent entirely new switching, routing, network infrastructure, satellites? Energy infrastructure?

choicehunter

I can't believe so many people still misunderstand BTC so badly. BTC Main chain is not intended to be direct world currency for daily transactions. It is perfectly designed as a base layer protocol similar to Fedwire or TCP/IP. Those are base layers. But built on top of the base layer are many sublayers that make it versatile and even more powerful. You likely use their sublayers every day even though everything with finance/money or Internet is ultimately settled with those base layer protocols. They are absolutely right that BTC itself isn't directly a good currency. Any more than fedwire is a good method for billions of transactions per second either and TCP/IP can't handle all of the super complex stuff we do through the internet without its secondary And other sublayers. It's totally fine if people hoard the base layer as a store of value and the ultimate Apex property. There will be plenty of sub layers that will allow it to be used as currency and a billion other things totally unrelated to money. The base protocol is always more simple than what the sublayers turn it into.

bitusher

Depends how you define "downtime" in Bitcoin. Technically there has been no downtime since 2009 , we consider the march 2013 reorg as "downtime" but bitcoin was still technically "working" even though some txs had to be re-included in blocks hours later. To be fair, you can say protocols like HTTP , IMAP, POP3, TCP/IP don't have "downtime" either So protocols in general typically never have downtime **globally** but can have localized outages (like your lite wallet node being down so you need to go into your wallets config and temp change nodes to send a btc transaction )

Becoming-media

It’s a stupid, ambiguous question because technological inventions is built on top of other inventions - like WWW, TCP/IP, computing, electricity etc. for “Bitcoin”. And what does “best” even mean?!

eurocohete

I’m running two Bitaxe Gamma 601 units mining directly against my own Bitcoin Core full node (running 24/7 on a machine with an NVMe SSD). I’m not a programmer — my coding skills are pretty basic — but I managed to get it all working step by step with a lot of testing, trial and error, and some help from ChatGPT. I use a custom setup with three main scripts: – a Stratum TCP proxy to handle the Bitaxe connections, – a block builder to construct valid blocks from my node’s data, – and a job updater that refreshes mining jobs in real time whenever the blockchain changes. It took time and patience, but now everything runs perfectly and completely independent — no pools, no intermediaries, just pure solo mining against my own node.

JanPB

The problem is in many jurisdictions around the world it's illegal to even keep illegal content in computer memory without saving. Besides, the entire idea is ludicrous: it's like adding space for advertising to the TCP/IP protocol. Just use a separate layer if you need this kind of utility. Imagine HTML was an embedded part of TCP/IP, it's just complete nonsense. I have no idea what the Core people are thinking, they are either total idiots or compromised (I suspect the latter). Either way, something must be *majorly* reformed regarding the Bitcoin Github merge access. The current situation is not sustainable.

SnooEagles2610

TCP/IP sure is aging… SMH

AutoModerator

Post is by: levopower and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1o1biz0/insider_tool_for_meme_coin_sniping_foxaisnipercom/ Hi community, i am hoping to find some help from the experts in here. This tool ([https://foxaisniper.com](https://foxaisniper.com/)) got recommended to me for being an "insider tool" for sniping Meme Coins on the Solana Blockchain. I wanted to connect my phantom wallet to this tool via ([https://foxaisniper.com](https://foxaisniper.com/)). Upon connecting you need to "load" SOL to the FOX AI (minimum of 2 SOL). I tried connecting 4 times and got a different error message every time. After contacting their support team via telegram the team always advised me on what went wrong. After "solving" each of the told issue, another error popped up. But on every connection request of my phantom wallet to the FOX AI, the FOX AI pulled all my SOL from my wallet, but now i cant access the software. The support team says that they can see my FOX AI account with all my SOL, but they cant help me as it is a self custodian wallet. So right now my SOL are gone and there is no way for me to access it, as there is another error and the support is telling me that i need to use a USA VPN connection with a TCP protocol to access it properly (i am from the EU). These are the 4 Transactions: \- [https://solscan.io/tx/67yhpuP4oF9LbNAebtjbaiHjzYwhVdnLFMhgau6aExBANbu7uP18YsCZDbMVexeTdGtKPpsCQGbfik1UGJvGEWS](https://solscan.io/tx/67yhpuP4oF9LbNAebtjbaiHjzYwhVdnLFMhgau6aExBANbu7uP18YsCZDbMVexeTdGtKPpsCQGbfik1UGJvGEWS) \- [https://solscan.io/tx/W7gbBsgBj7Lt6EP8eucNcBjo1NNtSH6upkfbgSoLZTZD4jiC1WESMorBdmTUEPCpZgBMpwSD4FwBdSuYtUC3utB](https://solscan.io/tx/W7gbBsgBj7Lt6EP8eucNcBjo1NNtSH6upkfbgSoLZTZD4jiC1WESMorBdmTUEPCpZgBMpwSD4FwBdSuYtUC3utB) \- [https://solscan.io/tx/q5B3kye2L79epc6LXynn9SWmgBXTVetNusv8x3K1ojuSLa6NpwajghbnCweTmXuaksG3m3vDDpbMmnsR4d7ckuR](https://solscan.io/tx/q5B3kye2L79epc6LXynn9SWmgBXTVetNusv8x3K1ojuSLa6NpwajghbnCweTmXuaksG3m3vDDpbMmnsR4d7ckuR) \- [https://solscan.io/tx/2czoGf6nqBRcHcYAgYjEN85HJDvhtnM4G6j6bqHp73Yy3rcte6q67U2ggJJhM1Q462Wmii972cCoV4NCjfC8g9cD](https://solscan.io/tx/2czoGf6nqBRcHcYAgYjEN85HJDvhtnM4G6j6bqHp73Yy3rcte6q67U2ggJJhM1Q462Wmii972cCoV4NCjfC8g9cD) So now i just dont know what to do. Is this a scam where they just find reasons for me to "load" SOL onto this tool again and again? Or have there really been technical issues.... I appreciate all of your help. Thanks alot! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Dry-Mousse-6172

The internet evolved over time, beginning with the ARPANET network in the late 1960s as a U.S. defense project and transforming into the public internet thanks to breakthroughs like TCP/IP in the 1970s and the World Wide Web in the 1990s. Key figures include J.C.R. Licklider, Vinton Cerf, and Tim Berners-Lee, who developed essential concepts like distributed networks, universal communication protocols, and user-friendly hyperlinked information

Objective_Digit

Bitcoin is not a car or a company; it's a protocol. They can be upgraded and are very hard to replace once they become established. Look at TCP/IP, for example. Furthermore, altcoins are beholden to Bitcoin in a way that new cars or companies are not to their predecessors. You only have to look at how alts behave when Bitcoin "sneezes". Not only would they not exist without Bitcoin, I doubt they'd be worth anything without it.

mickalawl

Layers of abstraction that provide a separation of concerns can indeed be powerful like TCP/IP stack. However crypto L2s are not that. They are more like plastering wallpaper over the top of something to paper over the cracks. L1 might not scale for example so an L2 is invented , but that usually then immediately has to sacrifice decentralisation perhaps. There is no modular architecture here that introduces layers of abstraction that allows independent modules to concentrate on their respective iareas of concern and with a clear interface agreement to the next level. Its wallpaper glue to.hide the cracks. And L3 will just be different wallpaper.

rgnet1

What you call L1 flaws, others might call security through simplicity. Kind of like TCP/IP only tried ti do one thing really well.

Jenn2895

Chainlink. CCIP is designed to be the TCP/IP of blockchain…

hawtdiggitydawgg

I feel like a lot of the answers here don’t necessarily get it. Even some of the pro Bitcoin ones. It’s be interesting to see how this same questioned is answers in the Bitcoin specific subreddit. I don’t know enough about this in particular but a bitcoiner influence regularly mentions that it’s the protocols that, I believe, are powerful from a technology perspective. likening it to things like TCP/IP for the internet. Like is said I don’t know much about that technology piece but find other reasons to support it b

King-Choco

Exactly, layers are the key, and history shows us how this plays out. The internet didn’t bend itself to people’s comfort level, people had to adjust to the internet. Even the most powerful institutions on earth couldn’t stop it, they had to adopt it, build on it, and align themselves with it or be left behind. The same applies here. Bitcoin is the TCP/IP of money, the base layer. It doesn’t need to be shiny or convenient by itself because it isn’t meant to be. It’s meant to be rock solid, unbreakable, and permanent. On top of it, other layers will emerge, evolve, or get replaced entirely, just like HTTP/HTML built the web on top of TCP/IP. That’s why the “Lightning is garbage” argument misses the forest for the trees. Maybe it’s Lightning, maybe it’s something else, but the point is: the foundation is already here, and it won’t adjust to us. We’ll adjust to it. Just like the internet, adoption won’t be optional in the long run.

MachaMacMorrigan

The Internet was around for twenty years plus, before Berners-Lee invented HTTP/HTML and the foundations of the World-Wide Web. We use TCP/IP all the time, but no-one sees it without Wireshark. Layers. I tell you. Layers.

annonnnnn82736

so it’s like TCP/IP for blockchains or Stripe for inter-chain smart contracts?

JustStopppingBye

I already gave it but heres more. >*With millions of digital assets spread across thousands of public and private blockchains, interoperability between blockchains is absolutely critical to overcoming fragmentation and building scalable global markets. This mirrors the early Internet, which was once divided into isolated intranets until TCP/IP unified them into a single network. On top of such a unified foundation, DeFi is already demonstrating how blockchain and oracle technology can modernize traditional capital markets and usher in a new era of more efficient, transparent, and programmable financial services. Chainlink seamlessly connects data and value across blockchains and traditional systems, accelerating the inevitable convergence of DeFi and TradFi into a unified global financial system.”* **Sergey Nazarov, Co-Founder of Chainlink**

rgnet1

My opinion is Bitcoin was invented and had a magic confluence of necessary properties: uncensorable, trustless, decentralized, and finite supply. The technology and economic marriage was perfect. If Bitcoin tech existed without the Austrian economic model, it would not have succeeded. Everything that came after Bitcoin was the result of a developer or businessperson who thought they could do better. While competition is ordinarily good, it is the same as trying to promote your own Internet protocol. Imagine if we had 1,000 fragmented Internets with incompatible email, web browsing etc. TCP/IP is the network protocol of the Internet, and while not perfect, it works. Bitcoin is the protocol of modern money and while not perfect, it works. Everything else is noise and unnecessary fragmentation. Do yourself a favor and just buy bitcoin for the long term. Anyone who has held bitcoin for 5 years is in the green and by a better margin than any other asset. You don't even need a hardware wallet. 1. Download free, open source Electrum or Sparrow 2. Disconnect your wifi 3. Generate a new wallet. Write down the seed phrase. Keep it secret, keep it safe. 4. Copy the "zpub" to a note file. (Used in step 6) 5. Delete the wallet. 6. Create a new wallet file from the zpub. This is a "watching only" wallet. You can receive bitcoin to it, you can check your balance. No one, not even you, can spend from this wallet. Your future self in 5 years will thank you. Your future self in 10 years may be retiring if you bought a decent amount.

AutoModerator

Post is by: Aldhyabi and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1na1dlx/bitcoiners_say_dont_trust_verify_but_nano_takes/ Look into Bitcoin's issues today ( Spamming , Data on chin, UTXO bloat , solo Node issues, you'll likely find this is the root cause ( **not cooperative by design ) but ( Extractive by Design)** In a collapsing system, we don’t need another winner-takes-all, fee-extracting protocol. We need a neutral, open, permissionless settlement layer that works like email or TCP/IP, foundational infrastructure for humanity. At its core, Bitcoin's system doesn't reward alignment with users or the ecosystem, it rewards extraction. Miners are incentivized to extract as much value as possible , This creates a race to the bottom, bigger miners dominate, centralizing power in the hands of a few Extractive capitalism philosophy You don't want to call it a hedge against inflation anymore. It's a toxic philosophy that can also affect mental health in the long term. **Nano's Approach:** Security is provided *intrinsically*. **The system rewards alignment, not extraction.** Nano have Different Philosophical Approach, to have **Critical responsibility in Hyperinflation** Nano has optimized for being the ultimate Medium of Exchange ("Digital Cash"). to have maximum utility by being instant and feeless. Uses negligible energy, a Raspberry Pi can secure the network Unlike Bitcoin's PoW, Nano uses Open Representative Voting (ORV), where nodes vote on transactions without mining or energy waste. This rewards alignment, delegates (reps) are chosen by users based on trust and performance, not hash power *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

GIGAbtcHodl

You nailed it, this is way bigger than “internet money.” Bitcoin’s a game changer, like TCP/IP for value. Corrupt fiat fuels wars, breaks families, and traps us in survival mode. Bitcoin’s hard cap and halving flip that script: saving wins, inflation loses. Saylor’s right - it’s a protocol leveling the playing field. Elites can’t cheat the game anymore; they’ll have to play fair or watch fiat crumble. Stack sats, stay strong, and let’s ride this paradigm shift to freedom!

JustStopppingBye

It’s not because you’re using the wrong analogy. What you’re really asking is why would every bank or corporation want its own database and I could give you a million reasons. The only thing they share is the connection between their databases, which is TCP/IP or the blockchain equivalent, CCIP. https://blog.chain.link/from-tcpip-to-ccip/

paidzesthumor

How is that any less myopic than saying every large corporation needs their own TCP/IP?

kyleleblanc

It’s been 16.5 years so far. Global domination is still 2-4 decades away. Bitcoin is a protocol like TCP/IP and unlike technologies that are winner take most, protocols are winner take all. We don’t have another internet based on a protocol that’s different from TCP/IP, everything converged over the last 3-4 decades to use TCP/IP and Bitcoin will do the same thing for global finance. TCP/IP = how you exchange packets of data LNP/BP = how you exchanges packets of value (UTXOs) Bitcoin is not asking for anyone’s permission because it doesn’t have to, it simply will continue to absorb all global wealth until it becomes the global unit of account, and when it does everything will be priced in Bitcoin forever and all prices will continue to go down over time forever as all the global productivity gains flow into Bitcoin forever.

drnoisy

Bitcoin is a protocol. The protocol cannot change. The software implementation of nodes on top of the protocol layer can change (think internet browsers like chrome on top of the internet itself TCP/IP). The beauty of nodes and knots is that they are open source, anyone can make one, and Bitcoiners are free to choose their software implementation that secures the network. Changing the core rules of bitcoin is effectively impossible without 51% of miners, 100% of nodes agreeing to a new version. Which isn't going to happen anytime soon. Also another crypto won't become more popular, because bitcoin is the only truly scarce crypto. And it's the only truly scarce one because it's the only truly decentralised one. And it's the only decentralised one because of proof of work and the size of the network and it's high hash rate. Other proof of work cryptos are too small to be secure, and therefore not decentralised, and therefore their supply caps can be manipulated and inflated. So there's no threat of any other crypto 'becoming more popular' because bitcoin is the only true store of value on the market.

not420guilty

The first sentence says “Activist group Great Firewall Report spotted the outage, which it said disrupted all traffic to TCP port 443 – the standard port used for carrying HTTPS traffic.”

AbysmalScepter

The internet wasn't invented in 1991, that's just when web browsers and web pages were created. The internet was launched in 1971 with the invention of TCP/IP. So realistically, crypto would be like the internet in 1986. But that's not what people describing it as "the internet of the 90s" are talking about anyways. They aren't comparing it to the technological maturity of the internet, they are comparing it to the speculative mania of the dotcom bubble.

rankinrez

I think it is reasonable to say the Internet started in 1969 with the first ARPAnet nodes. Or at least 1983 with the move to TCP/IP. But yeah 91/92 was first time it became available outside large companies and universities.

northcasewhite

HTTP was invented in 1991, not the Internet. TCP/IP and email existed before that. Crypto will become more useful when people have a need to avoid fiat. It could take a long time, but it will happen.

mement0m0ri

Interesting comparison. I don't see it that way though, here's what I see Mobile/AI adoption curves worked because those techs had instant, universal usefulness Bitcoin’s curve is different, it’s not a gadget everyone uses daily, it’s more like infrastructure (closer to TCP/IP or gold) Mass usefulness can take decades The internet took \~30 years. Even electric cars were first invented in the 1800s After 16 years, Bitcoin has already proven itself for censorship-resistant money, store of value, and cross-border money transfers (people still use Western Union, which is expensive and slow) Whether it becomes as mass-consumer as phones is debatable, but usefulness isn’t just hhow many people use it every day It’s what problems it solves that nothing else can.

Dettol-tasting-menu

Network effect (game of chess, English language, email protocol, TCP/IP etc)

Natural_NoChemical

So basically XRP wants to be the TCP IP of money?

xaviemb

There is a reason why the longer someone looks at crypto the more they gravitate to BTC eventually... The short of it is this: others seem like they might be next up, it's human nature to try and explore, and find what's next... however in this case, BTC is structurally different. There is no way anything else can do what BTC does better. You figure this out along the way... just hearing it from the start usually isn't enough to make you realize this, you have to explore why everything else isn't BTC to really understand why there is a huge gap between what BTC is and everything else is just trying to be it. The easiest way I can condense this all down to a single statement: BTC is like TCP/IP which the internet was built upon. Everything else (all crypto) is basically a company trying to use BTC's struture to show they can be different. (better?)... but they can't... because inherently they are all started by someone who benefits from their adoption, and pushed to the masses as a 'better' alternative... without being truly free and open to humanity like BTC was from the start. In that way, every other crypto is basically like a company trying to tell eveyrone it is relevant, while Bitcoin is the technology they are all trying to build off of or from (yes even ETH is trying to be BTC, but if you explore why they are not... it becomes obvious eventually why ETH is 100% never going to become what BTC is)

Ok_Passage_4185

That's essentially what Wifi is. Bitcoin is not strongly tied to TCP/IP (Internet) networks. Any well connected network will work. That said, if it had to run entirely over FM or whatever, it would probably fragment into regional block chains. How big or small that region is ("all of West Coast" or "everyone in my apartment building" are both possibilities) is the real question.

SpendHefty6066

There is no specific place to go. It is a massive journey. Here are some ideas: * Run a node. And connect your wallet to your node. * Do analog entropy to generate your private key represented by your seed phrase * Keep your private keys in air gapped cold storage. * With the above set up, you make the realization that you now have everything required to transact with the Bitcoin network and no force can prevent you from spending however you wish, whenever, and with whomever you want. * It is programmable money. Bitcoin is also an Internet protocol. Like DNS, HTTP, WHOIS, TCP/IP and so on. Bitcoin transfers value electronically without asking permission. Understand that Bitcoin has mitigated trust between two parties that want to transact at a distance for the very first time in human history. This absolutely monumental achievement cannot be understated.

MundaneAd3348

I did some quick calculations. It would take 8 years to download the blockchain using TCP IP over Shortwave. No the bitcoin network can not be run effectively over radio.

St0uty

> we still use standards we designed in 1991 for cell phones (2G GSM), in 1982 for the internet (TCP/IP) and in 1992 for GPUs (OpenGL) Are those things deeply dsyfunctional (like btc with payments)? Clearly not if the world is still using them. It would be totally impossible for the world to actually use btc as a currency today, indeed btc proponent's have largely abandoned this notion, claiming it's now "digital gold" (e.g. a greater fool bubble)

x0wl

Yes, we still use standards we designed in 1991 for cell phones (2G GSM), in 1982 for the internet (TCP/IP) and in 1992 for GPUs (OpenGL)

_Vatican_Cameos

98% of internet users don’t understand TCP/IP either

kyleleblanc

The only way Bitcoin goes to zero is if the protocol outright fails. The last 16 and a half years have proved that isn’t going to happen. Saying Bitcoin is going to zero is the literal equivalent to saying “any day now TCP/IP is going to fail.” Anyone saying it’s “going to zero” doesn’t understand how protocols work.

tellorist

*TCP/IP is doing great right now. But loads of other protocols like X.25 and DECnet failed miserably. so, TCP/IP has no future, and nobody will use it, IBM will lobby congress to ban TCP/IP*

Ar0war

The thing with bitcoin is that it is not controlled by anyone. But to understand Bitcoin first the people need to understand fiat, how it's made, 1971? Then you get the realized Bitcoin is to money what TCP/IP is to the internet.

Sillyfiremans

He said that bitcoin cant be changed because it hasn't happened yet. Then he talks about chess, which has changed significantly over the years. He then mumbled on about HTTP and TCP/IP without giving any context as to how that means bitcoin will always be the default digital currency. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess#History

glasser999

DARPA created TCP/IP. Sometimes, I wonder if they created BTC, too. Or were at least behind it in some fashion.

biba8163

I am not a BTC Maxi. It's not about BTC maximalism but about being smart. I love XMR but I don't view it as an investment and there is a huge opportunity cost of holding it instead of BTC long term. And if you've been in crypto for a while you shouldn't be falling for tech memes. **Only NOOBs fall for the tech memes.** I've re-posted my comment from 2019 over and over the last few years trying to warn noobs who keep falling for token dump tech memes like DOT, ALGO, AVAX, HBAR, etc all that stupid shit and keep losing money. > **Top 7 unique, high-potential cryptocurrencies of 2019 that are actually innovating the space** (2019) > **Nano, Monero, Augur, Lisk, IOTA, BitTorrent, Upfiring** > You seem to be fixated on tech. Tech means nothing if nobody uses it and if nobody cares. NXT was the most advanced coin in 2013 and still one of the most advanced now. Created by the founder of IOTA, it had a ton going for it. People thought it was like TCP/IP or Linux of blockchains and the future: > - First coin that was 100% Proof of Stake pioneered by IOTA founder > - 1.5 minutes block times > - Java > - DEX > - Messaging > - Assets in the blockchain > - Programmable APIs > You should learn from 2015 and stop being naive thinking these the shiny tech cryptos that nobody uses and cares about all are undervalued great investments. https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/bza16u/comment/eqt1lh5/

Ar0war

Also, the same bad arguments agaimst btc I read during corona when btc traded around 4k. I didn't lose my holdings. I keep buying while many people around me talked the way you do. You need to understand, TCP/IP is to the internet what Bitcoin is to money.

rgnet1

The problem is they think they can see those gains from alts instead. But alts will never be the revolution that bitcoin was and worse, 99% of them will be worthless. You just don’t need more than one global payment protocol, same as you don’t need more than one protocol for Internet traffic (TCP/IP) or more than one type of electrical outlet in your home.

rgnet1

Genuinely interested in what alts ever offered outside of lottery wins by timing a pump. Bitcoin is a protocol that makes sense. It’s not perfect but neither is TCP/IP. You just need one that works well enough to be backbone infrastructure for P2P payments and doesn’t debase like fiat. All other coins that try to do the same (but more optimized! Faster! Contracts!) are just unnecessary fragmentation born from a founder seeking riches, not adoption of global decentralized payments. ETH has fundamentall different architecute to decentralize compute power versus simple transactions, but arguably this could be layer 2 on Bitcoin too. Filecoin was most interesting alt to me because a decentralized file storage makes massive sense for privacy / anti-censorship, but the market’s been tepid on for over a decade.

lagom_kul

TCP IP is quite esoteric but eventually everyone used the internet.

madman6000

Crypto will go away when TCP/IP does.

Nanobirds

“It isn’t as valuable as I perceive?” That’s an interesting way to pose the question. But I think I understand what you’re getting at, and I’ll do my best to respond. To be clear, I don’t conflate market price with intrinsic value. In my view, Nano’s current valuation reflects a combination of low adoption, structural limitations, and missed opportunities—not a lack of utility. Here’s how I break it down: ⸻ Why hasn’t Nano appreciated in value? My take: • No financial incentives or hype mechanics – There’s no mining, no staking, no token burns, no inflation schedule—nothing that creates yield or fuels attention cycles. In a market largely driven by incentives and narrative loops, that’s a structural disadvantage. There’s no engine to attract speculative capital or sustain trading interest. • Deflationary and volatile – A fixed supply with zero inflation leads to inherent volatility, especially in low-liquidity environments. That repels short-term traders and makes price discovery less stable. • Not listed on major exchanges – Nano declined to pay listing fees during a critical growth window. Whether principled or shortsighted, that decision limited access, trading volume, and visibility. In a momentum-driven ecosystem, that lack of exposure had lasting consequences. • Two major blows at key inflection points – The BitGrail theft and spam-based network attacks hit during pivotal bull runs—moments when Nano needed to prove reliability. They weren’t fatal, but they severely undermined trust and stalled broader adoption. • Highly anecdotal, but telling – I spoke with an acquaintance working in the crypto division of a major financial institution—someone deeply embedded in the space. He had never heard of Nano. After going through the protocol, he was genuinely impressed. One conversation doesn’t prove anything, but it highlights a broader issue: the discovery process in crypto is broken. Between noise, marketing hype, and inflated promises, real utility often gets buried. It’s like sifting through a landfill for working code. • Adoption isn’t meritocratic – Institutional interest is driven by regulation, internal incentives, and brand optics—not necessarily by technical merit. • Good tech often lags adoption – EVs, MP3s, TCP/IP—many technologies sat dormant until macro conditions shifted. Utility often takes a back seat to timing. • I fully accept it may never happen – Not every sound technology succeeds. Nano may stay niche or never see widespread use. That’s a realistic possibility. • Still, Nano fits where the future could be headed – A feeless, energy-efficient, deflationary currency aligns well with emerging use cases: machine-to-machine transactions, AI-driven microeconomies, and scalable value transfer. If the market ever pivots toward actual function, Nano is structurally ready. ⸻ So no—I’m not holding out of blind belief. I simply see something rare: a protocol built for utility, not hype. I know the risks. But I’m okay being early… or wrong. Not trying to convince you—but do any of these points resonate with you?

Qwahzi

Nano uses the same incentive model as most open source software/protocols (Linux, TCP/IP, HTTP, SMTP, etc). The technology itself (and the businesses/benefits that technology can bring) are the incentive. You don't need everyone to run a node, just enough to keep it decentralized

Qwahzi

Nano was given away for free via CAPTCHA faucet, and when audited, its initial distribution pattern looked very similar to Bitcoin's early distribution pattern: - https://imgur.com/a/u6nEYXS - https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/h7fmge/ The network itself is the incentive. Just like people use Linux, HTTP, TCP/IP, etc - the benefits of the technology itself (and the business opportunities they create) are where the incentive comes from

CryptCranker0808

> And yet Apple eventually prevailed. Every computer OS company that existed at that time failed, including the version of Apple that was dependent upon Macintosh OS, the Apple-II, and the LISA. The only reason apple even exists today is the ipod and iphone. > TCP/IP is far from perfect yet is still the preferred internet protocol. Bitcoin doesn't have to be perfect to keep its crown. Protocols are hard to usurp. You can't be a protocol when no one builds on or uses your system.

Objective_Digit

> A great question. And the answer is...? >You know how Microsoft crushed Apple and all other comers in the late 80's and early 90's? There were dozens of competing operating systems and computer companies, and Microsoft was neither the best nor the biggest nor the fastest nor the earliest, not the most profitable, not the most secure and not the most stable or reliable. Microsoft crushed them because they made it the easiest to build and operate software of any kind on their system and have it just work well enough. They didn't care if you ran their software or a competitors - so long as you ran it on DOS/Windows. They didn't care if you used hardware they liked or hardware of a competitor - So long as you ran it on DOS/Windows. They didn't even care if their contracts paid very well - so long as those contracts put DOS/Windows on every computer sold. And yet Apple eventually prevailed. >The BTC I got into over a decade ago was not a ponzi scheme - It intended to useful for many things. We compared it to TCP/IP. TCP/IP is far from perfect yet is still the preferred internet protocol. Bitcoin doesn't have to be perfect to keep its crown. Protocols are hard to usurp.

CryptCranker0808

> Why is Bitcoin's price so much better than Ethereum's if everyone's using the latter? A great question. > And if Ethereum has so tps would it matter if Bitcoin has a bigger market cap? It's not TPS. You keep pretending that the real numbers on Ethereum are comparable the imagined or theoretical numbers on other altcoins. Other altcoins either have almost no actual usage, or only bots like Steem, EOS, or BCH used to have. They didn't have any fees that amounted to anything, so the numbers didn't matter. > They not meaningful if they are just being used to transfer other altcoins. Then no one would pay for them. And yet, they are. You know how Microsoft crushed Apple and all other comers in the late 80's and early 90's? There were dozens of competing operating systems and computer companies, and Microsoft was neither the best nor the biggest nor the fastest nor the earliest, not the most profitable, not the most secure and not the most stable or reliable. Microsoft crushed them because they made it the easiest to build and operate software of any kind on their system and have it just work well enough. They didn't care if you ran their software or a competitors - so long as you ran it on DOS/Windows. They didn't care if you used hardware they liked or hardware of a competitor - So long as you ran it on DOS/Windows. They didn't even care if their contracts paid very well - so long as those contracts put DOS/Windows on every computer sold. Markets are not rational in the short term, and Ethereum's usage metrics don't matter to most investors - until they do. In order to not be essentially a ponzi scheme, coins need real use and real usefulness. The BTC I got into over a decade ago was not a ponzi scheme - It intended to useful for many things. We compared it to TCP/IP.

MittenSplits

Well we have about 10,000 attempts and none of them have done it. You're thinking about BRC like a financial asset with competitors. It is fundamentally a computer networking protocol, and those have much different adoption patterns. The internet only has need/room for one native monetary layer that is neutral and decentralized, and that layer has been chosen by an emergent process Another helpful protocol to compare it to is chess. You can go make your own version where the pawns can move backwards, but everyone is too busy with the original protocol to care. Just like much of the internet tech stack (TCP/IP, SMTP) Bitcoin has been relatively ossified by it's large user base.

Smoking-Coyote06

>And I don’t know about you, but I do a lot more than one transaction a year. Im storing capital, so I dont do many transactions with my btc, but I get your point. I dont use btc for daily transactions, just saving money. >It’s not decentralized because even though a few people can spin up a node There are thousands of reachable nodes. >The internet became ubiquitous as quickly as infrastructure could be built. Nope. ARPANET was live in 1969. TCP/IP was invented in 1973/74, ans ARPANET transitioned to the new protocols in 1983. So oddly enough, Krugman said the internet was useless 17 years after the modern internet was invented. And here you are, similarly calling the bitcoin network worthless after 16 years... Btc is the fastest asset to reach $1T market cap. When Krugman made that statement 4 of the Mag 7 weren't public companies, and Apple and Amazon were less than $2B each. He was categorically wrong, after 30 years that is clear. Bitcoin has already been successful in its first 16 years...its next 30 will be interesting as well.

Smoking-Coyote06

You're still mixing the concepts. Yes, there are centralized exchanges. And yes, many people purchase and store the bitcoin on centralized exchanges. That has nothing to do with the distributed, decentralized network protocol. >And none of Bitcoin the assets value is derived from the networks decentralization. That is incorrect. Btc value is definitely based on the security of the network and the decentralized nature of the network. If bitcoin (network) could be hacked (insecurity) or if the US gov could walk into Bitcoin headquarters and turn of the servers (centralization), btc the asset would not be as valuable. It's the facts that it is highly secure, and not centralized that gives it value to a global market. >90% of transactions are to/from centralized exchanges and 90% of Bitcoin “owners” have never even made a Bitcoin transaction, they’ve just bought and held on an exchange. What percentage of internet users actually tap into their own SMTP server to send an email? How regularly check their IMAP or POP3 servers to receive an email. Do you think most people actually understand TCP/IP, or do they just type a web address and click go? Centralized exchanges, online brokerages like Fidelity, BlackRock, Charles Schwab, JP Morgan, etc. will be the way most people access btc, the same way most people get to the internet via Gmail, Google, safari, etc.

Mantis-Prawn

TCP/IP (internet as we know it) was created in 1983, whilst it took to the late 90s for the average househeld to be connected.

siasl_kopika

\> you are most probably a digital native, meaning you know the internet. This is a misconception; I find that most younger people born in the internet age actually understand tech, networking, electronics, etc quite a bit less than older people, on average. In my observation, the most knowledgeable are from 30-50 years old, likely because they came from a time when DIY and lots of learning were required to make things work. They had shop class in school to learn power tools, electronics, motor/engines, etc. And that knowledge was expected and common too. People born more recently are spoiled with lots of stuff that just works out of the box and has a low barrier to entry. they cant tell a TCP packet from a phone virtual circuit. They dont know how their phone seems to be able to make calls without wires or physical connections. Its all plug and play, point and click, black boxes of magic and mystery. They take it all for granted. Of course, there are still some smart people who choose to learn; but that is increasingly a rare choice people must make consciously and no longer the norm. Not to mention it seems like IQ and education standards have monotonically fallen since their peak sometime in the late 70s. We are sliding into idiocracy. \> Please please please, beginners, invest some time in research before investing money in Bitcoin. People have been ignorant of money since 1913, and thats still the case. I dont think there is much we can do to help people with this. People who choose fiat will go broke as usual. People who choose alts will go broke faster People who choose bitcoin, but leave it in custody will go broke too People who choose bitcoin, and actually hold it, will be the ones left standing. Eventually people will copy them, because they will always be the ones left standing. This will repeat until it is common sense, and people will smack you upside the head for doing anything else.

Asleep_Blueberry_177

The problem is. You can't make a Bitcoin 2.0 with a similar proof of work mechanism. (Rewarding miners, while creating coats to secure the network). The organic grown, largest network is what secures BTC. To recreate a bitcoin 2.0, (without any central entity everyone has to trust), the network is weak (or uses a different algorithm). It is easy to short the new currency, rent miners and attack the new BTC 2.0 network and kill it with a 51% attack and make big money. (BTC is the other way round, you make money by working for it, not attacking it). Also BTC is more like a protocol and it has the first mover advantage. Everyone is using TCP/IP on the Internet, we can easily use a "better" transfer protocols, and there are nieches where this is required and done, but you will not change all of the Internets communication, because someone has a "better" idea. You just don't replace millions of working machines as long as it gets done what is required. Everyone knows this, so why would a different transfer protocol replace all of this?

Atyzzze

>Protocols are built in layers. HTML on top of TCP/IP for instance. HTML isn't a protocol, it's a standard. HTTP/HTTPS could be considered a protocol >This is logical and intelligent engineering. Lol, well, explain then how come we see almost no Bitcoin L2s whereas other ecosystems have dozens and dozens of L2s ?

Alfador8

Protocols are built in layers. HTML on top of TCP/IP for instance. Or Cashu built on top of Lightning built on top of Bitcoin for another.

Ok_Score9113

It doesn’t need to used and circulated to have value but if it doesn’t become the actual money of society that would be a failure. When fiat collapses, as it has always done in history, humans go back to sound money. And Bitcoin is the only sound money that can support modern society. The catalyst would be a huge print that causes hyperinflation. But you need layer 2 solutions to be ready for mass adoption at that point to really have everyone using it. Right now it’s a slow and steady thing. Things take time, look at how long it took from TCP/IP being discovered until full global internet adoption. That’s where we are The main thing is layer 2 solutions for bitcoin need to be reliable, scalable, and easy to use for the masses.

rgnet1

>Just a protocol that speaks for itself. Kind of wild when you think about it 🤣 It's not just "kind of wild." It's the reason all other cryptocurrencies are just noise and foundationally about their creators generating wealth for themselves than solving a problem. When Satoshi created bitcoin, it was the same as any other open source developer putting something into the world that they felt hadn't been solved. It's all written in the single paragraph opener of the white paper. Did he know how much wealth he stood to gain by working on it and releasing it in the wild? Sure, but anyone else in the world could have generated the same wealth at exactly the same pace as him if they bought into his vision on day 1 and ran their own node. Other cryptos are pointless variations on a protocol where only one needs to exist. Like TCP/IP, the backbone of the Internet, it's not a perfect networking protocol, but it's better to have one that's good enough than fragment one global community. The only fragmentation of the Internet has been done by authoritarian countries like N Korea, Russia and China, to maintain control. Creators who start other cryptos are sort of the same; they don't care about what's best for the crypto user or the world, only what they can control and self-serve from. Imagine if all crypto enthusiasts from the beginning had just united behind bitcoin instead of splintering into all their own clones; global adoption would be a given. Instead, we suffer 15+ years of a confused, noisy landscape that has actively discouraged its use. The uncertainty has made it easy for its natural detractors -- traditional finance and government -- to make simple arguments against it and discourage average users from trying or adopting. And despite this, the trend continues to show that everyone ends up owning bitcoin first or exclusively in the end.

shikiyan

No, I see gold as an inferior predecessor to Bitcoin. Bitcoin has all the monetary properties of gold—scarcity, durability, and decentralization—but improves on them dramatically. It's more secure, more portable, and offers true ownership. Unlike gold, Bitcoin can't be easily confiscated. It’s divisible down to sats, and anyone in the world can generate a seed phrase, making it universally accessible. Gold supply grows at about 1.5% per year, doubling roughly every 50–60 years. Bitcoin, on the other hand, has a fixed supply cap. In fact, its circulating supply goes down over time as coins are lost or forgotten—making it even harder than gold. Let’s not forget history: the U.S. once made private gold ownership illegal. Witth bitcoin, in a worst-case scenario, you can cross a border with nothing but a memorized seed phrase or have it hidden in plain sight. Gold ETFs miss the point entirely—those are paper claims, not real possession. I do have a small portion of my pension in mstr, but I barely contribute to it and can’t really access those funds anyway. The most exciting part is that Bitcoin also has the properties of an internet protocol. Like TCP/IP, it’s a base layer that anyone can build on. We will see a revolution with money as more and more people are struggling with inflation.

Ruskig

I have zero doubts because it only needs the TCP/IP system to work. In other words, as long as the Internet exists, Bitcoin will also exist.

enqvistx

To 3: Bitcoin is a protocol. We all use SMTP/IMAP for email and TCP/IP for web even though there are better, slicker, leaner alternatives. Network effect wins.

Alfador8

Bitcoin is a protocol like TCP/IP, not a video rental company. Protocols win via network effects. Bitcoin has already won. The market has decided.

fractalfocuser

Yep I'd agree. We're in another quiet building stage for crypto. First it was the nerds, then the speculators, and now the first mover normies are coming along. They don't trust it yet (and they shouldn't, skepticism is how banks stay in business) but they're testing the waters. Another 5yrs of development will see the rest of the normies start to move onchain. Use cases need to be proven viable, long term stability needs to be earned, and regulations need to be signed in blood. It took 15 years to go from NCP to TCP/IP and another 10 years for HTML to come along. The dotcom bubble burst in 2000 and people said the internet was a fad. Now I'm writing this on a mobile device with near constant network connection more than 50 years after ARPANET came online. Revolutionary technologies take a lot of time

Hour-Oil-1666

Lolz, where do you see IPv4 and TCP being replaced, funny thing is that ipv6 failed and we can see fall back to v4 :)

Hour-Oil-1666

Tell that to TCP or IPv4 :D

biba8163

In 2019, I kept warning gullibles not to fall for the tech meme. Of course people fell for token dump tech memes like ALGO, etc. Don't be like bagholding governors. You can do better. > You seem to be fixated on tech. Tech means nothing if nobody uses it and if nobody cares. NXT was the most advanced coin in 2013 and still one of the most advanced now. Created by the founder of IOTA, it had a ton going for it. People thought it was like TCP/IP or Linux of blockchains and the future: > - First coin that was 100% Proof of Stake pioneered by IOTA founder > - 1.5 minutes block times > - Java > - DEX > - Messaging > - Assets in the blockchain > - Programmable APIs > But what happened? LTC is #4 and doing great and NXT is pretty much dead. https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/bza16u/top_7_unique_highpotential_cryptocurrencies_of/eqt1lh5/

Astropin

I'm saying if you understand dominant protocols then you understand why Bitcoin can't be replaced. If you think it can then you don't understand how dominant protocols work. TCP/IP is the dominant protocol of the Internet. It has been around since the 70's. It doesn't get replaced...it gets built on top of. Bitcoin will get built on top of ...not replaced. Volatile? Yes... risky? No. There is a difference.

KPS-UK77

It's not really comparable, TCP/IP is literally a protocol, it was serving a purpose globally. Currently BTC is not integrated into any system. Really there's nothing stopping the whales suddenly crashing in, selling up everything and switching another altcoin, which would I turn cause that coin price to rocket. Until BTC is integrated into our banking/financial world it's still a speculative.

oespanyol

Best analogy is the TCP/IP protocol for the internet. Not the best, but one of the first ones that quickly became the dominant. Very difficult to replace now unless there is a new paradigm.

JanPB

It's just like in the early 1990s when people thought (including Warren Buffett) that digital commerce wasn't real. I remember snickering around that time: "Microsoft? And what do they produce? Just software? How is that sustainable?" What the TCP/IP does to information, Bitcoin does to the money. Also keep in mind that nothing has intrinsic value except water and food. Everything else (gold included) relies on a mere social convention or agreement for it to function as a carrier of value.

sun_cardinal

Elaborate, because to me it seems like the server or instance hosting the original NFT image was taken down for violating cloudflare's policies. How does that tie into networking? I am also assuming you mean networking in the TCP/IP sense.

BaconGreaseShot

Of all the theories I've heard, Dr. Jack Kruse has the most compelling take on how bitcoin was originally created - The concept was started by the Jewish mob as a way to launder money. In 1973 Meyer Lansky is released from jail and went on to search for the most brilliant IT person to setup a P2P money laundering system for Murder Inc and CIA. That's how he discovered David Chaum Chaum works from 1981 - 1998 creating and running Digicash. Couple of his customers are Duetche Bank, Mark Twain Bank (ran by mob) they were trying to take Lanky's idea and use Chaum's system, Lansky dies in 1983, who was trying to build his private P2P network. Chaum open sources it in around 1987-1989, then the Cypher Punks come in. Digicash is sold in 1998 to Naveen Jain who ran Infosis, which was google before google. Len Sassaman, a PHD candicate under David Chaum shows up. He realized what Chaum, Adam Back, what everyone didn't know. Timestamping is key. Sassaman was involved in the creation of TCP/IP for TOR and that's where he learned about timestamping. If it didn't go open source and Sassaman wasn't the PHD candicate for Chaum, bitcoin would have never happened. 02:19:45 of this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yALOChgRrHQ&t=8437s

GeeEyeDoe

Technology tends to have a first in rule to it. The first best thing is the most popular. Amazon, Netflix, TCP/IP, cellular networks, etc. People try to make copies but the first one has the networking and marketing power such that it will not be overtaken unless someone finds a much better alternative (ie VHS to DVD to Digital Streaming). Bitcoin was the first of its nature. Decentralized blockchain protocol with an immaculate conception whose creator(S) vanished. It is the best so far. Sure, someone could make a copy and vanish, some may use it, but it will never get the same level of adoption and admiration at the first, Bitcoin, which is trusted and proven.

biba8163

> Silvio himself said... Reminds me of all the BAT fanboys worshipping Brendan Eich in 2018/2019 saying the big brained creator of Javascript, founder of the Mozilla foundation was creating a revolution in digital advertising and I am a fudder who doesn't understand what's happening when I kept telling people BAT was a money grab gimick token. Of course big brained Brenden is a scammer and so is Silvio and they'll say anything to dump on you at a higher price > BAT is a gimmick and it'll never be adopted https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/cflfh9/why_does_brave_need_its_own_currency_why_cant_it/euba6hr/ > simply the best tech I warned people not to fall for the tech meme almost every day back in 2018-2020. Of course people fell for token dump tech memes like ALGO, DOT, ATOM, HBAR, etc over the next few years and everyone has lost money. > You seem to be fixated on tech. Tech means nothing if nobody uses it and if nobody cares. NXT was the most advanced coin in 2013 and still one of the most advanced now. Created by the founder of IOTA, it had a ton going for it. People thought it was like TCP/IP or Linux of blockchains and the future: > - First coin that was 100% Proof of Stake pioneered by IOTA founder > - 1.5 minutes block times > - Java > - DEX > - Messaging > - Assets in the blockchain > - Programmable APIs > But what happened? LTC is #4 and doing great and NXT is pretty much dead. https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/bza16u/top_7_unique_highpotential_cryptocurrencies_of/eqt1lh5/

admin_default

The TCP/IP system you’re using now has been the standard for 50+ years, with no signs of abating. Protocol level technologies can persist far longer than anyone will be alive.

Objective_Digit

AOL was/is a service provider. Bitcoin is a protocol. TCP/IP is an old, old protocol. It still hasn't been supplanted. "Slow" is completely relative. It's far faster than shipping gold. Monero may be faster (for whatever that's worth, after all a Bitcoin wallet shows a 0 confirmation tx immediately) but it's less secure. https://howmanyconfs.com Privacy can built onto Bitcoin. Lightning txs are private. Monero will always be a target for regulation. >(finite supply neither creates nor preserves value Explain then how Monero is down 90% vs Bitcoin. This tail emission rubbish is what Monero heads use to defend no supply cap.

rgnet1

That question’s been asked since bitcoin’s invention and there’s been plenty of active friction. SEC put blockades up constantly until a judge ruled they can’t just block it without reason. IRS ruled spending a coffee’s worth of bitcoin is a taxable event same as selling a block of $100k. Banks actively propagandized first that it was a scam then that it’s unsafe, then that it’s worthless… until now they all have it as an investment option. Bitcoin is a protocol, same as TCP/IP is the ruleset the internet uses to communicate. You can’t shut it down. You can create friction. As long as “free” democracy countries continue to uphold an open internet (ie not China, Russia etc), bitcoin is neutral communication like every other bit of net traffic. Although even in those closed countries, VPNs can circumvent. Napster was shut down because it was centralized. Torrents are still used because bittorrent is just a decentralized protocol. And no, torrents aren’t just for criminals, same as decoupled money from government isn’t. Blizzard used to use torrents (they still do I think?) to distribute its massive Warcraft patches because centralized distribution would fail on patch day.

codingwithcoffee

**"Bitcoin is becoming too institutional..."** Ok. How could this be avoided as Bitcoin continues to grow? Could we reasonably expect mass adoption to spontaneously happen via word of mouth in local meetups? The path to mass adoption surely has to include some level of institutional interest and participation? **"It correlates too starkly to Wall Street, indexes and financial news..."** Bitcoin is a financial instrument, born out of a financial crisis. Whether we view it as an investment or not, there are people who do - which means that market events will have an impact as people react to them (and big players will manipulate the market for their own gain). **"There aren't any cool new projects..."** Well this would be news to people building projects like Lemon Drop, Flashnet, Charms, Spark, Beyond, etc. As the network / protocol matures, there is less need to refine and work on the core concept (although that is also still happening), and more scope for exploring potential layers on top that address other needs and (potential) markets. When the internet was born, the early work was all on boring (foundational!) stuff like protocols - agreeing how HTTP would work over TCP, codifying mail transport, ftp, etc. Then Mosaic was launched and everyone got in on the "make a browser" trend (kind of like NFTs). What "cool exciting" projects are happening on the HTTP protocol today? From a narrow view, nothing much - HTTP/2 was released in 2015 and HTTP/3 in 2022. Changes are measured in years. Take a step back though and it's vibe-coding, AI, and literally everything else being built on top of "the internet". In my view Bitcoin will mature like the internet. The core protocol will be updated rarely, and will form a stable platform for other innovations to happen. For example, integration into the mainstream financial services world, allowing crypto loans, payment through visa/mastercard, etc. **The biggest question though.. if you're** ***really*** **selling - where will you put your money instead?** Unless you're a "bullets and beans" guy, I don't see a lot of good alternatives... Sure you can hold it as cash. And this might even look smart in the very short term, but you still have to outrun inflation or you are losing purchasing power - and inflation is looking like things are about to get crazy. Stocks are in the crapper. Bonds are down. Will they recover? Probably. Do you think you can time it though? The best time to sell your stocks was yesterday. The best time to buy? So where do you store value for the longer term? Gold? It's basically Bitcoin for the industrial age. It will probably do ok over the coming months / years as a risk-off hedge. Will the digital version do better in the digital age? My money is on "yes". It's your money, so you are free to do whatever you choose. Good luck, internet stranger!

Objective_Digit

It's not the same. Bitcoin is a protocol, not a product. Where are the other versions of BitTorrent or TCP/IP?

diHobbes

I think Bitcoin will be used for much longer than that. Bitcoin is a protocol, basically a language for computers. Just like languages for humans the bitcoin protocol will evolve and improve so there won't be a need for a replacement. The same thing will happen with other internet protocols such as TCP/IP or the internet as a whole, it will evolve and adapt.

Puzzleheaded-Bug-223

Nice read/explanation. How can TCP/IP-like technology be commercialised though?

CunningStunt_1

My mistake. I misunderstood your post as chainlink is not a Blockchain. It's a oracle network, which is similar, as they both have nodes that work together to form a consensus. Chainlinks CCIP sits on top of 100s of other blockchains, like TCP/IP, does to bring the internet together.