Bitcoin has a larger hashrate, a larger network effect/larger adoption, a larger developer pool, and a functioning L2. Market cap doesn't matter, except that it also means more investment into infrastructure, more buy-in into the system, etc. These effects are multiplicative. And remember that Bitcoin can "absorb" innovations made in other chains, as it did with zero-knowledge proofs and other tech. The functional L2 is very very important as a P2P money protocol. You cannot scale L1 to contain all global transactions unless you make it hella centralized (blocksize debate) or build L2s and L3s. Monero has plans for an L2, but it's debatable if they actually have the development resources to pull it off. Lightning took years to get to where it is now.
"Pros" cited by monero proponents:
Variable Block Size
This is another way to say "big blocks, when we need them". If monero actually becomes the global P2P currency, this will be "big blocks, all the time". It's antithetical to decentralization. The higher the block size, the greater hardware resources to run a node. You can run a full Bitcoin node on a laptop from 10 years ago. The majority of Eth nodes are in corporate datacenters because it's not realistic to run it on home hardware/connection. Big blocks are not a real scaling solution for any decentralized system.
Privacy
Monero beats Bitcoin in this, there is no doubt. However, lightning and other L2s make significant gains in privacy for Bitcoin. Bitcoin can always upgrade to a more private protocol if it wants to, and many key people in the Bitcoin world are calling for it. Perhaps this will happen during the transition to post-quantum encryption. Things like coinjoin etc, if common, may also solve this problem. Monero's reputation as a privacy coin has caused some major legislative/political/adoption hurdles that Bitcoin hasn't had to face.
Replies (3)
The "functioning layer 2" (Lightning Network) you mention is pretty terrible in my opinion though. Payments fail quite often.
Larger adoption? How can you explain that Monero is more used than bitcoin in P2P payments?
You say that is antiethycal decentalization when you cant mine bitcoin with any device, and that is the really antiethical decentralization.
You also mention that you have more developed pools?
You don't have any decentralized pool developed and the only solution that would solve that problem was put apart 12 years ago, that would make bitcoin mining decentralized 👀
Lightning is a band aid, it doesnt work well if you use it by self custody..
And you tell that decentralization falls with the big blocks? Hardware grows 100x faster capacity than any blockchain grow, what isn't un-ethical is that you only can mine bitcoin with specific and expensive hardware..
Monero you can mine with any device, even a old android can mine monero..
This is a reasonable response.
however...
anyone serious about Bitcoin development acknowledges that eventually blocks have to get larger.
The devil is in the details of course.
when do they change? by how much ?Because of the speed of technology it becomes easier for people to run larger nodes on cheaper hardware all the time.
An elastic Blocksize limit makes the chain more flexible to sudden rushes of transaction volume without forcing that conversation.
It absolutely does NOT mean that it's suddenly going to be like ethereum and impossible for your average pleb to run a node.
So Monero's approach here makes a lot of sense.
You say that Bitcoin can absorb technology developed for other chains but note that Monero has in fact absorbed a lot of innovations that were designed for Bitcoin and not vice versa. In actual fact Bitcoin L1 seems impossible to change and all the Innovation is happening elsewhere.
