Why would people use an illiquid currency when there are others that have the same advantages of being able to use money electronically except for actually being able to make cheap and fast transactions?
If there was a version of gold that fluid and easy to transact with, people would use that instead gold.
There is no reason for bitcoin to exist without transaction throughput except for speculation using IOUs from exchanges.
Unless it was built on complex technology that most people don't understand. Hence comments like yours calling it a failure because there's still a stigma around it. Luckily the are others that have done their research and are investing heavily and helping build out the ecosystem.
Second, I never said there was a 'stigma' around it, that's also something you hallucinated.
> Luckily the are others that have done their research and are investing heavily and helping build out the ecosystem.
People who 'have done their research' say the same thing and people 'building out the ecosystem' aren't doing it with the one cryptocurrency that is purposely trying not to scale well.
Ask me anything you want instead of the lazy rationalization of 'they just don't understand'. Some people have been involved before /r/bitcoin was taken over and turned into a propaganda machine to churn out people that actually buy into the 'digital gold' nonsense.
You didn't actually confront anything I said at all, you just avoided it with a flimsy dismissal.
