By Bitcoin Majalah - 4 bulan yang lalu - Waktu Membaca: 6 minit
Percuma Seperti Dalam Kebebasan Bukan Percuma Seperti Dalam Bir
Bitcoiners Need The Guillotine
Seperti yang diperhatikan oleh ahli ekonomi dan ahli falsafah Scotland David Hume dalam Risalah Alam Manusia, tiada apa yang kita tahu tentang apa is benar boleh memberitahu kita apa patut adalah benar dan tiada apa yang kita tahu tentang apa patut untuk menjadi benar boleh memberitahu kita apa is benar. Dunia fakta objektif dan kebenaran moral adalah berasingan sepenuhnya. Hume memanggil ini sebagai adalah/sepatutnya masalah dan hujahnya bahawa penaakulan deskriptif dan normatif harus dipisahkan dikenali sebagai Guillotine Hume.
Guillotine Hume ialah philosophical razor – a rule of thumb for reasoning about the world. It is a way of cutting apart two lines of reasoning that become entangled when they intertwine. An argument where one side argues about what is true and the other side argues about what ought to be true is a useless argument. Those people are talking past each other.
Even more importantly, the guillotine is a tool for reducing bias in our thinking. Left unsupervised, our hopes can corrupt our beliefs – leading us to assume that which is true is good (naturalistic fallacy) and that which is good is true (wishful thinking). In the Bitcoin industry there are many who let their conviction about what Bitcoin Sekiranya be distort their understanding of what Bitcoin is. They need to study guillotine.
Desentralisasi Tidak Akan Menjadi Murah
Satu kebenaran yang keras tetapi mudah ialah desentralisasi sebenar adalah terlalu mahal untuk menjadi universal. Jika anda percaya pada nilai desentralisasi adalah mudah untuk melihat sebab anda ingin ia tersedia secara universal. Tetapi jika anda memahami cara desentralisasi berfungsi, ia juga mudah untuk melihat mengapa itu tidak akan dapat dilakukan. Matematik tidak membenarkannya.
Desentralisasi ialah - mengikut definisi – lebih mahal daripada alternatif berpusat. Untuk didesentralisasi, rangkaian memerlukan lebih banyak salinan sejarah rangkaian (petak biru) dan lebih banyak sambungan antara nod (anak panah merah). Menyelaraskan rangkaian berpusat pada asasnya lebih murah dan lebih mudah dilakukan. Bergantung pada tujuan rangkaian, desentralisasi mungkin berbaloi untuk dibayar – tetapi ia tidak akan menjadi pilihan yang paling murah.
The expense of running a network is split between users and validators. Networks can either limit activity on the network (which makes transactions expensive because they are scarce) or they can demand more work from validators (which centralizes the network). Bitcoin keeps the cost of network validation low by limiting the block size – but that also by definition means transaction space is limited. Transaction fees on Bitcoin mahal dengan reka bentuk.
Adding more capacity to the network wouldn’t make it cheaper for individual users, anyway. That’s because Bitcoin’s transaction fees aren’t set by the network, they are set by users’ willingness to outbid each other in the blockspace auction. You can’t lower transaction fees by increasing capacity because increasing capacity doesn’t change anyone’s willingness to pay. Users don’t decide whether to pay for a transaction based on how full the blocks are, they decide based on how high the fees are.
Blok yang lebih besar akan menjadi berita baik untuk pelombong (kerana akan ada ruang untuk lebih ramai pelanggan yang membayar) tetapi ia tidak akan banyak berubah untuk pengguna - yuran transaksi adalah lebih kurang sama. Istilah ekonomi mewah untuk hasil berlawanan dengan intuisi ini ialah Paradoks Jevons.
Inventing new Layer2 technology won’t make transacting on Bitcoin any cheaper, either. Technology like Lightning, Liquid, Fedimint and Ark expand the power and flexibility of what Bitcoin transactions can do – but making transactions more useful does not make them cheaper, it makes them more valuable. More ways to use Bitcoin transactions means more demand for the limited available blockspace. We should expect Layer 2s to make L1 Bitcoin urus niaga lebih mahal, tidak lebih murah.
That’s ok, because Bitcoin is not supposed to be cheap. It’s supposed to be Free.
Percuma Seperti Dalam Kebebasan
The lure of cheap decentralized transactions is strong. It was the heart of the blocksize wars and it is the central value proposition of most altcoin networks today. It’s also the driving force behind the widespread but misplaced belief that the Lightning network will allow Bitcoin scale to universal adoption. The reality is more nuanced: Lightning lowers the cost of using Bitcoin. That’s not the same thing as making Bitcoin cheap to use.
The truth is that Lightning channels require Bitcoin urus niaga dan Bitcoin transactions will inevitably be expensive. Bitcoin confirms ~0.4M transactions/day. That’s one transaction/person every ~55 years, assuming no one is born or dies while waiting. The long term price of a bitcoin transaction is difficult to predict, but it isn’t difficult to predict they will be rare: either because most people can’t afford them or because most people don’t want them in the first place.
There are proposals to make channel management cheaper (e.g. channel factories) but since every proposal ultimately depends on some on-chain anchor transaction, every channel will need to be purchased/leased somehow from someone who can afford the original transaction. Anthony Towns did some interesting analysis and estimated that there was room for approximately ~50,000 entities to transact directly on-chain. Everyone else would need to rent custodial services from one of those on-chain entities. You can use a copy of this spreadsheet to tweak the assumptions and run your own estimates.
Even if we ignore opening/closing costs entirely, channels themselves are not cost-free to maintain. Users need an online presence to receive payments / supervise their counterparties for misbehavior. They need to either perfectly balance their sent/received payments or periodically pay a liquidity provider to rebalance their channels. Most importantly, any bitcoin being used to create Lightning channel capacity is necessarily online and not in cold storage.
The marginal cost of individual Lightning transactions is very small, but the total cost of creating, using and maintaining a Lightning channel is actually quite high — because it is denominated in bitcoin and bitcoin is the scarcest resource in history. Telling retail users to open Lightning channels to make cheap transactions is like telling them to launch their own satellites for cheaper mobile internet.
To be clear, I am a believer in the value of the Lightning Network – I just don’t think it will bank the unbanked. The Lightning Network makes Bitcoin transactions more powerful, not cheaper. Payment channels will only make sense for people who make enough payments to justify paying to streamline them. For most people even owning a single on-chain UTXO will be a privilege of significant luxury. I’m not trying to defend that outcome as baik. Ia begitu sahaja. Ia wujud di sisi lain Guillotine Hume.
Bitcoin Is For Saving, Not For Spending
The enormous size and continued growth of the stablecoin market is proof there is plenty of demand for low-cost, disintermediated retail payments. But Bitcoin is not a panacea – just because low-cost payments are useful does not mean that Bitcoin is a useful way to make low-cost payments. Bitcoin is not designed to be cheap – it is designed to be durable. Those aren’t the same goals and they probably won’t be achieved by the same system.
Even in a world where Bitcoin transactions were somehow cost free we should masih expect stablecoins to dominate payments. Why would anyone who thinks bitcoin is precious want to spend it? Why would anyone who doesn’t think bitcoin is precious have any to spend? Bitcoin is emergency money, not convenience money. No one should be spending it on coffee.
Decentralized networks do not make good retail payment tools – they’re expensive, slow and unforgiving. Using Bitcoin to make a retail purchase is like driving to the mall in a M4 Sherman tank. It might be sejuk, tetapi ia tidak praktikal - dan ia tidak akan menjadi perkara biasa.
This is a guest post by knifefight. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Majalah.
Sumber asal: Bitcoin Magazine