That's because the older, slow-to-adapt coins are the ones that are seeing the huge volume. There are actually other cryptos out there that have solutions to the scaling problem. Regardless, any ecosystem like this needs time to adjust, and the rampant adoption of crypto this year has just been too quick for the products to keep up.
They don't. The entire concept is massively inefficient, and there is no purposed solution beside snake-oil like lightning which, taken even as vaguely proposed, fundamentally mutates the essentially characteristics of the overall concept.
You are inherently bounded by two things: synchronization time and storage space. The first limits the block time, the second limits the block size. Together they represent maximum throughput.
1) If you want a global network, you're ultimately bounded by the speed of light, which for 1 half-circumference of the earth is ~30ms. More in line with actual (halved) pings, let's say ~100 milliseconds. Coming close to that guarantees probabilistic chain forks, and anything lower is immediately and always infinitely generating blockchain(s). I'm not going to model it, but let's take a half-second as a reasonable baseline for something that has a suitably low chance of contesting chains.
2) If you have maximum utilization of even 2 MB blocks per every 500 milliseconds, that is ~120TB a year. You'd be spending 300 dollars a month to just keep up. And before you say "...but it becomes cheaper" have you, erm, checked up on the actual Kryder rate lately?
In any event, your growth is still bounded by it.
and assuming a transaction size of 200 bytes per second, which is a very small/simple BTC transaction, that's ~20,000 transactions as what's pretty much the theoretical
limit. You can't go any faster, and if your blocks get much larger people can't store the chain without a data center.
That's theoretical, here's practical:
I've already detailed one of the more prominent and recent ones (ethereum) and illustrated how it doesn't offer much of an improvement on TPS, it's basically double, maybe 15 TPS and it's growing extremely slowly.
Even LTC, the vaunted "silver", is maybe 60ish.
Visa, by itself, handles a little less than 2,000 a second on average and can cope with peaks of 24,000 (in other words, it practically achieves more than what cryptocurrency can even theoretically extend)https://usa.visa.com/run-your-business/ ... etail.html
And those numbers are from FIVE YEARS AGO, it's almost certainly much more now.
Regardless, any ecosystem like this needs time to adjust, and the rampant adoption of crypto this year has just been too quick for the products to keep up.
"Rampant adoption" is untrue. There is no adoption. You've offered no evidence of adoption. Virtually no one accepts bitcoin, some of the exchanges (including the one with the most volume) do not even accept USD.
Of the few places that took BTC because it was popular amongst their particular demographics, many of them are dropping it. To with, Steam, just last week. Regardless of even that extremely pertinent fact, BTC was always pittance to their revenues and they never handle it directly anyway (Valve used bitpay, they never saw anything but USD on their end)
What you are saying about adoption is flagrantly false. If you continue saying it, after my repeated factual corrections with zero refutation, it becomes a lie.
So don't do that.
What was "gibberish" is the ludicrous extreme you take a informal analogy and then argue against your own extreme that no one else is defending. We're not even talking to each other. You're arguing against the straw man you created. You may have the energy for this but I don't.
The analogy is completely baseless and it's used to lure the gullible.
If you can't handle any criticism of it, don't approvingly repeat it.
And the space is over flowing with ideas and attempts to rectifying these obstacles.
No, it isn't. All you proponents do is repeat that premise, never do you ever attempt to even vaguely elucidate upon it.
I get the feeling that you guys so poorly understand the subject that you cannot even understand my criticisms. Certainly you all frequent the (non)arguments that I am "ignorant of it" (apparently because I don't like it, as to know it is to love it) or that "I'm not worth your time" (as if shilling tropes common to bubbles and repeating short platitudes takes a lot of it) or that I'm "arguing past you" (of course I am, your only purpose here is to shill whereas mine is to explain).
But he'll just be 9 in a little bit and has a long way to go before he's a useful adult.
What would make him a useful adult?
I mean, you're not even handwaving here. Just sort of furtively moving your arms as if to suggest that you eventually might.