Yeah, that’s basically the core tension. People don’t voluntarily choose friction in the long run. If something is harder to use and more expensive for the same basic job, users route around it — that’s just how human behavior works. The issue isn’t that BTC “can’t scale” in theory, it’s that in practice scaling gets pushed into layers that add complexity and trade-offs that ordinary users end up absorbing indirectly: custody, routing, liquidity, fees at different points in the stack. And once usage moves off-chain or into custodial setups, you do end up with a system that starts to resemble the traditional model it originally wanted to replace — intermediaries, gatekeeping, and trust assumptions reintroduced through design constraints. Meanwhile BCH is taking the opposite approach: keep the base layer usable, keep transactions cheap enough for normal activity, and let people interact directly without needing infrastructure knowledge just to send money. That difference matters because users don’t adapt to ideology — they adapt to what feels like cash in real use.