And the number of transactions will increase over time, adding to the cost. So what does it net out to?
It doesn't look favourable when the bloated payment behemoth can get by charging 2-5%, but crypto transfer fees end up being significantly higher, and prone to surge pricing if too many people are buying Cryptokitties at the same time.
The prices on layer 2 like lightning and polygon/matic are pretty reasonable right now. I don't think its far fetched to say that the network capacity will increase with adoption.
I only have a hobby interest in crypto, but even etherum is planning on having side chains that operate independantly.
To me, crypto's biggest risk is a lack of decentralization. The bitcoin network basically votes to adopt bitcoin changes but the etherum developers can force changes on the etherum network. Whats the point of proof of stake if most of the coins are owned by the original developers? Ala Chia. Why not just run a sql database if 51% of the network is owned by a person/entity or a few. Bitcoin is pretty decentralized in ownership unlike every other coin attempting to be a currency but pooling in bitcoin has put too much hashpower into the hands of a few.
Without wide adoption, crypto is not decentralized. There is little point if the various networks retain their oligopoly.
And the number of transactions will increase over time, adding to the cost. So what does it net out to?
It doesn't look favourable when the bloated payment behemoth can get by charging 2-5%, but crypto transfer fees end up being significantly higher, and prone to surge pricing if too many people are buying Cryptokitties at the same time.