Hacker News Reader

Comment by dadoge | Hacker News Reader

14 years is a lot different than 3 years.

That a whole decade more for people to learn about it, and especially since the main features has not changed. Yes, there are improvements to the protocol, but the main thing has changed little over the years

View on HN

Betting on the stability of a protocol is a good way to lose your money when that protocol is obsoleted.

Edit: I'm coming right out and saying it; if we even have to talk about L2 chains, you might as well just admit that Bitcoin itself needs an update to be usable.

Paper cash was an innovation to solve the issue that gold is hard to lug around. And very much an analogy of a L2 network

It is arguably easier to counterfeit than gold (there is fools gold too…)

The base layer is very secure. L2s will be faster, but have a trade off of being less secure.

Note: the L2 Lightning Network is different than L2s for ETH like POLY, POLY has its own market cap (garbage idea IMO). Lightning is just a tool to make BTC more efficient

See, it's already over. If you have to explain that to a layperson, it's not going to get adopted. Furthermore, if people are taught to adopt this mentality, that puts them at pretty great risk for getting scammed.

Again - do whatever you want and invest wherever you please. But L2 chains are not catapulting crypto back into usability, and Lightning is living evidence that Bitcoin's bet failed. If you need auxiliary technology to transact the money you supposedly own, your protocol is broken to the core and needs replacement.

> See, it's already over. If you have to explain that to a layperson, it's not going to get adopted.

Does every layperson have to adopt stocks or commodities? Are these also dead if a layperson does not adopt it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com