Well, no. I think that placing your trust in the lowest common denominator is trust misplaced.
Further, I am not looking for a system 'governed by the technocratic elite', I am looking for a system with enough capacity to be money for the entire world. And 3-7 tx/s just ain't gonna cut it.
Your bloated Weather recording chain will never cut it
Because....?
BSV's fate should be clear after the next major parabolic rise, I'm going to assume. It might be the preferred path for bitcoin hopefuls who jump ship from BTC if the blockchain becomes clogged again.
That roughly is my thesis, yes. If the next wave of FOMO inrush gets forestalled because they can't take possession of actual BTC due to weeks-long tx times and can't afford it anyhow due to sky-high tx fees, what would anyone expect to happen?
If Blockalypse II comes and goes without a significant loss of BTC market dominance, I will reassess my thesis. I don't much anticipate the need to.
Or non-BTCers might prefer BCH.
BCH seems to have made serious inroads in commerce - mostly in Asia. Unfortunately, they seem bent on self destruction of competing featureitis wars.
Or the BTC blockchain might not become clogged (2nd layer solutions).
With more value locked up as wBTC on the Ethereum network than within LN, and with the gap widening by day, I don't any of us should look forward to that eventuality with glee.
Or transaction fees will be sky high, but no one will care because their BTC will be worth $100K+, and no one cares about buying coffee with BTC anymore (BTC=digital gold narrative).
If owning BTC is to be solely the domain of the rich, why are we endeavoring to limit its network's capacity limit to a $30 investment in HW?
I'm guessing those possibilities are all priced into the ~98% discount that BSV currently has against BTC.
Yup. Talk about an asymmetric bet fueled by knowledge asymmetry...