There is a notion that, among all the cryptocurrencies, one is going to displace all the others.
That there is only one cryptocurrency would be counterproductive for the ecosystem.
Is the future multi-chain?
Yeah. Rather the present is already multi-chain Why would we think that this will cease to be the case in the future? Beyond the fact that there are fashions, moments of boom or decline and different trends, the fact that there are multiple blockchains is something that is very difficult to stop being the case, given that it is an ecosystem open source.
It is enough to look at other similar areas to find a parallel: is the future of Linux multi-distribution? Of course, why would all distributions converge into one if each one has its specificities, its specialties and its own community of developers and users? But the conception in the crypto world is different, why? Because Characteristics of the business field are mixed with those of the open source field.
In the business world, a company’s actions generally reflect its performance and if they experience a crisis they can be put out of business, in which case their products are absorbed by another company, probably a rival, or simply discontinued. This is because each company has an exclusive right and knowledge about its products, so by no longer being able to employ people who are in charge of maintaining it, it remains stagnant.
In the open source field this is not the case, and even if there are companies that are dedicated to developing and maintaining software, there can always be other developers who take over if they disappear. They can even create a parallel version of that software while the original company is still operating.
Almost nothing in the cryptocurrency space is under an exclusive license and all altcoins are to some extent versions of Bitcoin. That is why even projects that have failed miserably like Terra They are still active.
If we move our attention from the business environment to the natural world, where Darwin’s postulates prevail, we will also find that Diversification rather than convergence is the normsince natural selection has no end, in any of its meanings: neither an objective, nor a limit. Which brings us to the next question…
Which crypto is going to “win”?
Bitcoin has already won. Bitcoin was there before all of its altcoins and none of them would exist without Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the mother of cryptocurrencies in every sense. However, maximalists imagine a future in which only Bitcoin exists. To me that does not seem feasible nor desirable for several reasons.
It is not feasible because of what was expressed above: because cryptocurrencies do not go bankrupt like companies. While many cryptos are redundant and don’t really offer anything useful to the market, that doesn’t mean they stop existing. Considering also that most exist on multi-token networks like Ethereum, they are even less dependent on their own performance to continue existing.
Secondly, it is also not feasible due to the subjectivity of the users, who can arbitrarily decide to use one currency or another. What other reason would explain the fact that there are so many stablecoins tied to the value of the dollar? They all offer the same utility, a stable price and the ability to convert them into US dollars. Despite that, more continue to appear.
In that case, we are dealing with companies that may eventually collapse and stop converting cryptocurrencies into dollars, but the fact that there are several dedicated to the same thing without a clear winner is something that applies to the rest of the cryptocurrencies.
Communities of users decide to meet and use a specific currency, or an ecosystem of contracts linked to a crypto or NFTs is created and that is totally subjective. At this point, the Bitcoin maximalists and the Austrians enter into a contradiction: saying that Bitcoin is going to prevail because it is objectively better than the rest. is to ignore the fundamental principle of the subjective theory of valuewhich is what gives it that name. The same thing happens with the argument that the value of bitcoin is given by mining, the proof of work, that is, the work value. Proof of work matches available workif no one wanted to mine bitcoin it would cost nothing to mine bitcoin, even adopting the labor theory of value it is difficult to justify it in the case of bitcoin.
Therefore, it is not desirable because That competition between currencies mobilizes innovation and many altcoins serve as laboratories for new functions. Let’s do the hypothetical exercise: if only Bitcoin had existed as in the beginning and altcoins had not been invented, would we have developed all the same capabilities that we have today? NFT perhaps Smart contracts? Probably more limited, such as those of Bitcoin. Automatic Market Makers (AMMs) I don’t think so, since there would be nothing to exchange in them. Privacy functions like those of Monero? They do not support other Bitcoin features Mimblewimble? It would impede Bitcoin’s already limited scripting capabilities.
Conclusion
That is, while Bitcoin wins, it can’t do everything, because some functions are mutually exclusive. Every software project must choose between different options at some point. By doing that it specializes, it does its job better, but at the same time it leaves space vacant so that another program can satisfy a different need.
This is where the power of FOSS (free and open source software) manifests itself: by allowing us to freely copy and modify the source code, we can create infinite versions of Bitcoin adapted to any use cases or user communities. This renunciation of exclusivity is the basis of its power, it is what elevates Bitcoin beyond a simple innovative product and turns it into a new paradigm, in which hero of a thousand faces.
Rather than fighting to see which crypto prevails over the others, I find it more productive to see how each one fits where it can fulfill its function and think about how to interconnect them so that they can provide greater value. There is very little merit in claiming to have created Bitcoin 2.0, which can do everything Bitcoin does and more, and therefore surpassed it, when you most likely used much of Bitcoin to create your new altcoin. Far from destroying or dethroning, you are standing on the shoulders of giants and continuing his legacy.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to its author and do not necessarily reflect those of CriptoNoticias. The author’s opinion is for informational purposes and under no circumstances constitutes an investment recommendation or financial advice.