What would you like to add?
A lot of people seem to think there’s going to be a single platform winner-take-all in crypto. They think that if any other token exists, Bitcoin hasn’t done its job. That’s just silly. Before any digital currency existed, in Colonial America, there were hundreds of local currencies. If winner-take-all was not a requirement in traditional money, why should it be a requirement in crypto?
Bitcoin is an amazing network with some great security properties, and BTC is a great store of value and transaction liquidity instrument to get money in and out of all cryptonetworks.
It has already won in those respects. We don’t need to squash all the other technical innovation in the space just because we believe that Bitcoin is great money and should one day become a global money standard for transactions.
Retail transactions account for about $22 trillion dollars in annual exchange, but there are hundreds of trillions of dollars worth of other assets trading hands in securities, real estate, bonds, debt, and so on. Those things will require sophisticated smart contracts to be tokenized effectively, and Bitcoin (purposely) is not a robust smart contract or token platform. Opening it up to make it great at smart contracts would hurt its capabilities as a security settlement layer for crypto.
Crypto is the biggest pie the world has ever seen. There’s plenty of room for Bitcoin and Ethereum, and hundreds of other cryptonetworks, each with its own trade-offs in security, speed, availability, consistency, and so on.
Don’t think of alternative networks as competition. This ecosystem is much more compositional and cooperative than competitive. Technology needs room to innovate, explore, adapt, and mature, and as these ecosystems blossom, Bitcoin will become more valuable. Ethereum, Cardano, etc. are good for the value of Bitcoin, and DApps will help bring Bitcoin transactions to the mainstream like no other technology can.