Blockchain networks don’t need external scaling solutions. There is no reason to have a sidechain where all transactions take place and only the settlement is recorded to the main-chain simply because a blockchain network has artificially limited itself with small blocks and low transaction throughput. External, multi-layer scaling solutions are inefficient and suboptimal ways to scale, especially when Bitcoin (BSV) already exists.
Just build on Bitcoin
There’s no reason to devote time and money into building a mistakenly called layer two solution for BTC or Ethereum since Bitcoin SV has already demonstrated it can handle scale and throughput on-chain. BSV does not have a block size limit and can handle thousands of transactions per second right now. With that in mind, networks like Ethereum could even use BSV as their scaling solution, rather than try to build their own low-level infrastructure to solve their scaling dilemmas.
“It’s not just impractical,” said Roy Bernhard, the CEO of The Bayesian Group. “It’s actually quite irresponsible for these types of crutch technical solutions [layer 2 solutions] to be offered to the community of developers and businesses running on top of Ethereum.”
“Don’t get me wrong, I applaud the creativity and certainly understand the urgency around wanting to find a solution. We were there too; but instead of trying to put wings on a pig in the hopes it would fly, we went out and found a fighter jet in BSV.”
Even if a software engineer was reluctant to build on BSV, they could build their apps and services on the platform of their choice, and port them to the BSV blockchain so that they can operate at scale and become bottleneck resistant.
“We are working on extending our tokenization platform to fully wrap ETH and the myriad of functional alt coins that need to find a new home,” said Bernhard. “The only way to save the Ethereum network is to build bridging technology that allows it to be put to sleep and cloned onto a proper blockchain. Think of it like ripping your DVD to a digital file and never looking back.”
Absorbing BTC and ETH
Ethereum 2.0 has been continually delayed because the centralized group of ETH protocol developers have no idea what they are doing. Instead of playing around with buggy or non-existent scaling solutions, it would make the most sense for ETH to transition or port to BSV. The Bitcoin network has already proven that it can handle high transaction throughput in short amounts of time. In late June, MetaStreme conducted a stress test on the BSV mainnet in which they passed around 970,000 transactions at an average of 600 transactions per second through the BSV mainnet at a fee rate of .5 sats/byte.
That being said, not only does BSV provide the scaling and throughput solution that BTC and ETH desperately need, but it is also significantly cheaper to send transactions over BSV than it is ETH and BTC. At the moment, the average transaction fee on BSV is $.0002 per transaction, while the average transaction fee on BTC and ETH is $5.158 and $2.848 per transaction respectively.
As you can see, BSV is superior to all other existing blockchains in many ways and provides an already built, already proven to work, solution to the scaling, throughput, and transaction cost issues that many blockchains currently face. Now, it is only a matter of time until a cross-chain porting solution is created and individuals from other blockchain ecosystems begin to reap the benefits of the Bitcoin blockchain.
New to Bitcoin? Check out CoinGeek’s Bitcoin for Beginners section, the ultimate resource guide to learn more about Bitcoin—as originally envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto—and blockchain.