People tend to celebrate periods of low luxury. It is time to clean the house, unify any UTXOS you need, or open or close any Lightning channels you were waiting for, and train some stupid JPEG 8 bits in Blockchain. They are seen as a positive time.
They are not. We have seen an appreciation of the explosive prices during the past few months, as we finally reached a standard of $ 100,000, which everyone took as Muslim during the last market tournament. This is not normal.
The image on the left is the average average every day since 2017, and the image on the right is the average price every day since 2017. When the price was pumped, when it was very volatile, historically, we saw Feerans Spike accordingly. In general, growth and climax match when the price did. People who actually buy and sell them on the chain, people assume the custody of their coins when they bought them.
This last station, which is more than 100,000, does not seem to have the same relative effect on Feerates, even moving early in this course. Now, if you already look at these two schemes, I am sure that many people will go, “What if this course is in the end?” This is possible, but let’s say it is not for a second.
What can this indicate? The participants who lead the market are changing. A group of people who are used to dominated by individuals who run themselves, and who run the risks of the opposite party by removing the gains from the stock exchanges, who have generated a time -sensitive activity, turn into a group of people who simply pass around ETF classes that do not need to settle anything on the chain.
This is not a good thing. Bitcoin nature is defined by users who interact with the protocol directly. Those who have special keys to delegate transactions that generate revenues for miners. Those who are sent to money, check transactions for consensus rules with software.
Each of these two fronts that are removed from the hands of users and placed behind the trustee veil exposes the stability of the bitcoin nature at risk.
This is a serious existential issue that must be resolved. Full stability of consensus on a specific set of rules depends on the assumption that there is enough independent actors with separate interests that differ, but are in line with the acquired value of the use of these rules. Whenever the group of the smaller independent actors (and the largest group of people “using” bitcoin “through these actors as a mediator), the more important for them it is to coordinate to change them mainly, and more likely to be their interests as a group that differs in synchronization of the interests of the largest group of secondary users.
If things continue to go in this direction, Bitcoin may end very well with the embodiment of anything from us here today they hope so. This problem is a technical problem, in terms of scaling Bitcoin in a way that allows users to independently control their money on the series, even if it is only through worse asylum, but also a problem with incentives and risk management.
The system should not only expand, but it should be able to provide ways to alleviate the risk of self -custody that people are used from the traditional financial world. Many of them actually need it.
This is not just a position on “do the same thing that I do because it is the only correct way”, and this is something that has effects on the founding characteristics of Bitcoin itself in the long run.
This article is taking. The opinions expressed are fully author and do not necessarily reflect the views of BTC Inc or Magazine Bitcoin.
The post Low Fees Are A Symptom Of Deeper Problems first appeared on Investorempires.com.
