Payment failure is a major flaw in all account-based networks, such as Tron, Ethereum, and other alts. The sad irony is that this impacts the demographic most likely to use crypto rails to begin with—those in emerging markets suffering from currency debasement and hyperinflation. Fortunately, there is a better alternative on #Bitcoin. 🧵
Estimates of Ethereum's payment failure rate range, but there was a consistent rate of over 1 million transactions per month during peak periods. A quick search on reddit will garner hundreds of threads like the one below of users losing money due to failures.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/qq5iin/failed_transactions_costing_250_is_not_fine/
Even Vitalik himself cites a ~2.3% failure rate. Note, we shouldn't fault those flocking to Tron or Ethereum with strong stablecoin network effects (there is clear use case) but, instead, encourage awareness of the downsides and the better alternatives that exist on #Bitcoin.
With what looks like the early beginnings of a bull market, users in places like LATAM, particularly in Argentina, where stablecoin usage is surging, should expect a similar spike in transaction failures and consider more architecturally sound chains like the Liquid Network.
In contrast to #Ethereum or Tron's account model, the Liquid Network, a Bitcoin layer-2, opts for Bitcoin's UTXO model. This enables an "all-or-nothing" transaction, avoiding the possibility of losing funds when sending a payment.
Liquid's fees are competitive with the aforementioned account-based models and stay reliably low. There is also the added feature of confidentiality (no one can see asset type or amount).
https://blog.liquid.net/guide-to-confidential-transactions/
Our CPO Jeff Booetz, recently detailed the tradeoffs between the UTXO and account models in an op-ed. The latter's lack of transaction reliability is only one example of the many downsides: it's also much harder to scale, less secure, and less private. Highly recommended:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/11/07/why-bitcoin-may-offer-the-best-foundation-for-blockchain-based-finance/?sh=453db2457ba2
prochronist
npub147…6lr8c
2023-11-09 23:05:58
Author Public Key
npub1478w8wcqdhq9utad68256d7xc2gjcek03t99sr6qnmh5drzr4e8sl6lr8cPublished at
2023-11-09 23:05:58Event JSON
{
"id": "8e75519dbbe4624dd9e174afc643231cdd5aea98cb22d8112003a86270e00883",
"pubkey": "af8ee3bb006dc05e2fadd1d54d37c6c2912c66cf8aca580f409eef468c43ae4f",
"created_at": 1699571158,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"bitcoin"
],
[
"t",
"bitcoin"
],
[
"t",
"ethereum"
]
],
"content": "Payment failure is a major flaw in all account-based networks, such as Tron, Ethereum, and other alts. The sad irony is that this impacts the demographic most likely to use crypto rails to begin with—those in emerging markets suffering from currency debasement and hyperinflation. Fortunately, there is a better alternative on #Bitcoin. 🧵\n\nEstimates of Ethereum's payment failure rate range, but there was a consistent rate of over 1 million transactions per month during peak periods. A quick search on reddit will garner hundreds of threads like the one below of users losing money due to failures.\n\nhttps://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/qq5iin/failed_transactions_costing_250_is_not_fine/\n\nEven Vitalik himself cites a ~2.3% failure rate. Note, we shouldn't fault those flocking to Tron or Ethereum with strong stablecoin network effects (there is clear use case) but, instead, encourage awareness of the downsides and the better alternatives that exist on #Bitcoin.\n\nWith what looks like the early beginnings of a bull market, users in places like LATAM, particularly in Argentina, where stablecoin usage is surging, should expect a similar spike in transaction failures and consider more architecturally sound chains like the Liquid Network.\n\nIn contrast to #Ethereum or Tron's account model, the Liquid Network, a Bitcoin layer-2, opts for Bitcoin's UTXO model. This enables an \"all-or-nothing\" transaction, avoiding the possibility of losing funds when sending a payment. \n\nLiquid's fees are competitive with the aforementioned account-based models and stay reliably low. There is also the added feature of confidentiality (no one can see asset type or amount).\n\nhttps://blog.liquid.net/guide-to-confidential-transactions/\n\nOur CPO Jeff Booetz, recently detailed the tradeoffs between the UTXO and account models in an op-ed. The latter's lack of transaction reliability is only one example of the many downsides: it's also much harder to scale, less secure, and less private. Highly recommended:\n\nhttps://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/11/07/why-bitcoin-may-offer-the-best-foundation-for-blockchain-based-finance/?sh=453db2457ba2",
"sig": "515d90a880e14d267c77a6309d6d2e7ab2d63ca6714fb68a10f9eefa516d6029a29ebd62a9c293e001a356e5ded34f7a1f2b685194a3484cf4f6176a23aced67"
}