Again, please specify exact quantities, I did, it's the least you can do.
> But sure, you can stick to the traditional monetary system where only a select few control the rules.
No, a body accountable to Congress (the Fed) which publishes quarterly audits is responsible for the currency. They act on behalf of the American people. As opposed to an un-elected, un-accountable cluster of core contributors and mining pools who seem to operate principally to the benefit of North Korea, ransomware operators, Ponzi schemers and various other kinds of criminals - financial and otherwise.
> You are free to adopt Bitcoin. No one will force you :)
And yet, if you hold an S&P 500 ETF you're exposed to this toxic nonsense via index components. If you're a pensioner in Quebec, you're exposed to this toxic nonsense via their stake in Celsius.
You seem to have a very US centric worldview. Maybe ask some Turkish savers how they feel, or any number of endless examples worldwide where saving in their own government fiat isn’t a good idea.
you can bet your bottom dollar there are some nerds in Sri Lanka who are very happy to own bitcoin right now. they'll be able to spend it as soon as the electricity comes back up.
I think we can all agree that they'd be strictly better off with a digital dollar substitute like USDC than with Bitcoin, as of course they'd be down bad with Bitcoin.
The big question there is whether or not their government allows businesses to operate outside of their control. I doubt many Turks would risk jail time by using a system which provides their government with a full transaction history, especially given the volatility - if you converted lira into Bitcoin a year ago, you’d be about even with not doing anything. If you bought 6 months ago, you’d have 50% losses.
> As opposed to an un-elected, un-accountable cluster of core contributors and mining pools.
These people don't control bitcoin. Developers and mining pool operators have their purposes in the network (designing new features and timestamping transactions respectively), but it's the users and node operators that validate the rules of the system. A code change to inflate bitcoin by 100% will never be adopted by node operators unless nakamoto consensus is reached.
According to this website it is possible to batch multiple channel openings in one transcation. They refere to a batch transaction containing 13 channel openings but I don't know where the limitations of this approach are.
With Schnorr signature aggregation, you can combine an unlimited number of signatures, but Bitcoin has a maximum of 4MB witness data, so there is certainly a cap.
> But sure, you can stick to the traditional monetary system where only a select few control the rules.
No, a body accountable to Congress (the Fed) which publishes quarterly audits is responsible for the currency. They act on behalf of the American people. As opposed to an un-elected, un-accountable cluster of core contributors and mining pools who seem to operate principally to the benefit of North Korea, ransomware operators, Ponzi schemers and various other kinds of criminals - financial and otherwise.
> You are free to adopt Bitcoin. No one will force you :)
And yet, if you hold an S&P 500 ETF you're exposed to this toxic nonsense via index components. If you're a pensioner in Quebec, you're exposed to this toxic nonsense via their stake in Celsius.