> Why do people assume there have been no new technical developments since Satoshi’s invention in 2009?
Not sure where this came from, but certainly from me. Lightning is a joke, we have ~20 better solutions already. Still they have some way to go to fulfill Sathoshi's vision.
Lightning is working for an entire nation in El Salvador. Why is Lightning a Joke? I commented below that the UX for Lightning needs work but I would consider that par for the course for an emerging technology.
What are some of the ~20 better solutions and how do they compare in terms of programmatic inflation policy, security budget, decentralization etc? Or are you just trying to equate Lightning to Nano or Visa since they all have low fees and fast transactions?
It's not working for the whole nation in El Salvador. Those people there are dependent on remittances from their relatives in the US. Since the incoming remittances are controlled by de facto mafia, they were hoping that bitcoin might be a way to avoid fishy middlemen.
However they are exposed to extreme volatility. If your income is so low that you need to rely on relatives abroad, then mere 10% price dip could be deadly for you, suddenly you cannot pay rent, etc.
A safer solution for them might be stablecoin transfers on some other quick and cheap chain. It has its own set of downsides and risks, but they might be relatively low compared to huge fx risk of BTC.
Not sure where this came from, but certainly from me. Lightning is a joke, we have ~20 better solutions already. Still they have some way to go to fulfill Sathoshi's vision.