800k is a made up number. And you are the one who started talking about theoretical concerns in weird ways, so you get check in reality. Bitcoin can support all online transactions with Lightning, there is no scaling limit to lightning. Does the title of the topic say people have to hold their own keys? Do they have to all be non custodial users? Nowhere is this implied, so your whole line of arguments is false because it talks about things with incorrect assumptions. We don't even need to make any improvement, the only difference is the percentage of users who has to onboard with custodial solutions that changes depending on scalability situation.  

You are making false interpretations of data and forming conclusions which are not supported by the data being used. It is not about what data is liked or not, if you do science wrong then the data does not show anything like I have demonstrated. There is no proof for your claims. Stablecoins do not fulfill the functions that Bitcoin do, they can not be replacements or alternatives to Bitcoin.

That is not a reality check, and that news does not make an argument against the point I raised. Read correctly what I written there exactly. People that know how to use better solutions have not been using Western Union for decades. That people don't know better or don't educate themselves for better solutions is not the fault of Bitcoin or a negative point of Bitcoin. It has nothing to do with Bitcoin at all..

Realistically, we're still far from that in the near future. Over the years, Bitcoin adoption has been great but with its current status, Bitcoin being adopted in all online transaction in the near future is still far from reality. A lot of people still prefers the traditional way and a bit of innovation with fiat and digital banking.

What I think is more possible in the near future is the increase of adoption and the increase of the uses of Bitcoin in daily transactions but not all online transaction.

The real challenge here may not actually be how fast the transactions would be, but rather whether or how merchants and users would be willing to deal with the volatility aspect of bitcoin. I don’t think there’s anyone that would want to receive a payment today just to find out that the value of their money has dropped significantly in the next few hours before they even get to use it. Except somehow that issue is being tackled without necessarily taking away its core properties, I don’t think we’ll be seeing so much of bitcoin’s everyday spending.

Users should not listen to people like this who are spreading misinformation about Bitcoin and the Lightning network. It does not matter how long they have been on this forum, information is false. The Lightning Network does not have a scalability limit that we will encounter in practice any time soon. Actually it has no practically relevant scalability limit, it has a migration limit only and that is related to layer 1 scalability concerns and is not a factor of the Lightning Network. Bitcoin can already support all the online transactions in theory. How these users would be migrated into the Lightning Network is a separate topic, the scenario that is provided here does not require that all users hold their keys. People need to stop being evil to users who choose to not hold their own keys whatever their reasons may be. Sometimes their choice is correct, other times it is not correct because it is for bad reasons like laziness. Still it is their choice and that is what Bitcoin is about, having your free choice..

This is not part of the topic at all. We are talking about technical aspects, not things that are part of the adoption mechanism. Volatility does not make any impact on whether Bitcoin can power all the transactions or not. I also greatly believe that the volatility concerns of the short term are exaggerated. The money that people use and the things that they buy often fluctuate value all the time, in many currencies it is worse than with Bitcoin and in some it is better. I don't think in practice more than a few people actually think actively about this, so the concern is way exaggerated.