Bitcoin needs a Layer 2 P2P Decentralized Exchange protocol and a couple of other things

Bitcoin network is unstoppable ingenuity. It’s the most secure decentralized global network of any kind ever and it boasts the potential to be even bigger than the Internet itself, since a decentralized web protocol could be built on top of it, leveraging the network’s inviolable security.

But there are three key issues that need to be addressed in the near future for Bitcoin as a protocol and as a monetary asset to realize its true potential.

1 – Decentralized Exchange. Pretty much all the money flowing in and out of Bitcoin right now is going through trusted middleman services, which obviously defeats the point of Bitcoin. Custodial exchanges such as Coinbase and Binance are, in the long run, like a trojan horse smuggling Bitcoin back to the fundamentally flawed legacy monetary paradigm.

A layer 2 decentralized exchange protocol with BTC and tokenized fiat markets would not only facilitate trustless access to Bitcoin but also, more importantly, there would be no way for hidebound governments like Turkey or India to actually enforce a Bitcoin ban. They can only go after and shut down centralized services. No government can confiscate your private keys.

2 – Feeless Off-chain protocol for micropayments. I look at Lightning Network as a PoC. It works, sure. But it could be so much better. If one day, 1 satoshi is going to be worth 1 cent or more, then you shouldn’t have to pay a tx fee higher than a fraction of that value to pay a merchant 50 cents for candy. Off-chain protocol with a fixed fee as a percentage of value transacted, let’s say .25%, would do wonders for merchant adoption.

3 – Nearly 100% Clean energy-driven mining. I actually think people who argue Bitcoin is bad for the environment don’t have a clue what they’re talking about. Let’s not even get started on those who say the energy used to secure the Bitcoin network is a waste!

Bitcoin mining incentivizes miners to adopt cheap energy, which is clean energy, and as the network continues to grow, the percentage of hash power derived from renewable energy sources keeps rising. But as the recent hash rate dip caused by a blackout in Xinjiang showed us, a significant proportion, more than half the total hash power, still harnesses dirty energy. Eventually, it may prove cost-prohibitive to use expensive non-renewable sources. But in the meantime, we need to get honest, engage this valid criticism and strive to encourage, maybe find a way to further incentivize, clean energy-driven mining instead of dismissing this as a problem that needs to be addressed.

submitted by /u/xcryptogurux
[link] [comments]