This is entirely wrong - longer term the best asset, with the best qualities will win in terms of global store of value. Its for this reason gold dominated over an infinite number of other physical items. Same with BTC over alts. Every single alt has given up even trying to be an "alt" to BTC's core function. Eth tried hard, but has now failed as many predicted would be the case, and this failure is of course reflected in its 3 years of decline relative to BTC. Its the cost (or "effort") required to produce BTC which gives it its value. If something can be be generated at the click of a button, its lack of value should be obvious.

Alts, memes, shitcoins, NFTS etc are infinite. BTC is the total opposite.

In case of a browser, you can use Internet Explorer, or Mozilla Firefox. Or Google Chrome. Or Safari. You have a choice. And if you create a website, then you don't have to change your hosting provider, if you want to switch your browser.

When it comes to cryptocurrencies, then you cannot hold both BTC and LTC, at the same time, with the same amount. You cannot have $1000 in "crypto", and decide, that "today, it is $500 in BTC, and $500 in LTC". And tomorrow, if you change your mind, then you cannot instantly say "now I signed this message, so now I pick $700 in BTC, and $300 in LTC, and want to use it in that way". You have to make a transaction, and pay some fees. Which means, that changing your choices, creates additional costs, which can very easily become a bottleneck, because you don't have "just $1000 in crypto". You have to pick something, and stick with that choice. And as long as it is the case, and as long as altcoins create completely separate monetary bases, you have to pick only "this coin or that coin". You cannot have both BTC and LTC, on the same UTXO.

So, it is more similar to the situation, where you have some EXE file, and you want to switch from Windows to Linux or MacOS. Of course, there is Wine project. But: it took many years for people, to get there. And still, there are many cases, where a particular EXE file works only under Windows, and nowhere else. And then, you are forced to use Windows, even if you don't want to.

And then, the comparison is even more fair, if you pick "x86 vs ARM vs M1 vs AVR", and so on. Because then, if you have your EXE, and you want to run it somewhere else, then you still need a compatibility layer, like a virtual machine, or a transcompiler, which will translate all of that, opcode by opcode. Then, you really have to "abandon EXE, to have ELF", just like you have to "abandon BTC, to have LTC". You cannot use both, at the same time, just like you can visit bitcointalk from two different browsers.

I think people need more features on existing coins, and not just more coins. If your strategy is "please sell your BTCs, and buy my product", then many people will not do that, because they know the history. I guess a lot of BCH users would really want to have 1:1 peg with BTC today. Now, after 7 years, it is clear, that those, who stayed with BTC, simply won.

And also, this "1000x" stick has two ends: there is of course a chance for 1000x gains, but there is also a chance for 1000x losses. And if you are not an altcoin creator, then you usually are on the losing side, when altcoin makers simply cash out into BTCs, and leave naive investors behind. It happened too many times in the crypto world, so wise people have many reasons, to worry about that kind of scenario (and not that many examples of 1000x gains, to really believe, that this particular altcoin is the unicorn).

Absolutely.

The strength of bitcoinis not in its technology (although at the time of its appearance it was a breakthrough in technology), but in its uniqueness, expressed in decentralization. No altcoin can compare with it. Also, the dominant credit of trust. No other cryptocurrency has such a level of trust from investors.

This moment was noticeably manifested due to the fact that bitcoin appeared 1st. This gives some head start, among other things.

Ethereum is also a strong brand, but it has never been able to come close to bitcoin in importance.

The main hardships for most altcoins is that they are of no use to anyone due to the nature of their origin (shitcoins), whereas bitcoin is needed by everyone.

Gold is perhaps 0.1% of the world's reserves in terms of a store of value. It used to be something like 50%.

Nothing is going to happen to Bitcoin, it's just that alternatives will become much bigger than it.


Consumer investors have demonstrated, based on their actions, that they don't care about decentralization. Today most Bitcoin is held using a person or company's known identity, using a broker or an app. And there are thousands of L2 "bandaids" on top of Bitcoin that basically eliminate decentralization--and lots of people are using these too. And then there's the ETF. And almost every crypto besides Bitcoin--which makes up about 45% of the total market today--is based on the defacto centralized PoS model or something similar.

Consumers simply don't care about "decentralization", and I suspect 95% of investors in Bitcoin don't even have the first clue about what that word even means. The market is clearly evolving away from this notion and it has been for years now.

I was making a broad point about the role that gold plays in our society today versus, say, 100 years ago. I understand that my numbers are just guesses, but the exact number wasn't the point: gold, as an "investment technology" has becoming a very tiny portion of the overall picture even though it was once dominant. That could be the case for Bitcoin and digital currencies in the future as well.


Bitcoin itself is decentralized--nobody disputes that. But the way most consumers use it is centralized, so it doesn't matter if Bitcoin itself is decentralized or not.


If you use an L2, you are betting on the integrity of the L2--along with Bitcoin itself. Whatever disadvantages the L2 has, your investment overall has. Hence an L2, regardless of the L1 behind it, is absolutely a centralized investment (and yep, investors don't care, because they don't care about decentralization).


The market is going the other direction, and has been for years now. The ETFs were the nail in the coffin for decentralization: it shows that investors simply don't care about it, and they just want to invest in a meme that goes up in price.

I have no idea what "events" you could be talking about, but I can't imagine something that is going to make people dump all of their ETH and other non-decentralized cryptos, dump their holdings in brokers and apps like PayPal and Coinbase, dump their ETFs in favor of self-custodial pure Bitcoin, and dump L2s. Why any consumer, let alone millions of them, want to do that?

Only if an alt beats BTC in a credibility tech or else, however, I do agree with you - it probably won't happen if things stay the way they are - which is, the most desired thing from a project is to generate as much profit.

I would add up that BTC has much more implications and use-cases for the future, not like gold - it's a digital gold, with all the beatuies of it put into for everybody to witness and use.
And, Usdt is not really an alt.. It's a stablecoin.

Are you trying to talk about how bitcoin is mined and the huge energy use? Even now energy use can use alternative energy and Bitcoin is not the only major energy user, as other industries are even bigger.

Bitcoin is still using POW and will never migrate to POS and that would violate the characteristics of a truly decentralized Bitcoin,
not a Semi-Centralized like ETH which is now a POS.

In the long run, the originator will remain on top and remain strong with the technology, and it continues to be developed.

And for you or anyone including me, about the chance to get 1000x it is the chance to get in altcoins or memecoins.
I also hold a memecoin that I believe will provide a huge profit, but you need to keep in mind that 1000x increase will only happen temporarily, and then it will drop -2000x.

I'm not Bitcoin Maxi or anything, I'm the holder of everything, collecting which is the best in my bag for the Bullrun that will happen later.

I would probably equate it to the same possiblity of the United Stated dollar losing the "control" of the worlds reserve currency, like a lot of people try and act like it a possibility.  No way in hell that the Yuan or Ruble is taking over, just like there's no chance of Ethereum or DogeCoin or whatever other shitcoin you can name, will take over bitcoins place, not anytime remotely soon , anyhow. 

I welcome competition though, if someone made a better bitcoin, than I'm all for it..but that has not happened yet.

Nice.