At Cindicator we already knew that our community has a wealth of knowledge of the crypto industry, but now we can share it with you. We’ve recently launched #CNDTalks on our Twitter and Facebook. It’s a series of 12 discussions with specific questions about blockchain, crypto, and fintech.

The community’s answers to the first three questions already blew us away. We were impressed by the depth and diversity of insights. In this post we’re bringing you the highlights. We encourage you to check out each thread and join the conversation.

What are the biggest challenges of mainstream adoption for cryptocurrencies?

Nicegameitis has succinctly captured the key barriers in a thread of tweets (the best answer):

- online security and liquidity: need more security as more and more exchanges are prone to hacks. - price volatility- personally I like that in crypto but lot of people are stuck with traditional markets because it kind of gives them security. - need regulations — few cryptos out there which has real product and their tokens can actually be used rest all are just pump n dumps. - need institutional investors - need more awareness, very few actually understand Blockchain, so need to get to common people and help to solve common problems.

Some commentators, including @Upupupandaway (FC Crypto) from the Telegram chat, were sceptical:

I don’t think crypto will be adopted soon, still a long way to go at least another 5–6 years it hits the mainstream, even if it hits earlier, mass adoption will take time, gaming- entertainment- travel — shopping,I think these areas have scope and can reach to far more people.

Rexovas, one of Cindicator ambassadors, has outlined additional possible drivers for adoption:

Direct fiat-crypto payment. For instance, if governments decided to enhance the banking system by implementing Blockchain systems and “tokenizing” fiat (Goldman Sachs is already doing this somewhat through Circle’s USDCoin). In this way, people will continue to pay for things in exactly the same way that they already are — many won’t even notice a difference, though behind the scenes bank settlements will happen much faster as they are no longer part of the ACH/SEPA systems. Tokenized fiat? From the government side it will take 5–10+ years, though banks can potentially speed this up if they pursue it rigorously. I think broader adoption of service platforms operating via utility tokens (e.g. CND) can achieve more accessible solutions much faster- it’s a matter of the regulatory clarity before there can be mechanisms to autoconvert fiat to tokens via, for example an in-app purchase.”

Do other cryptocurrencies have a chance or is bitcoin is too far ahead?

Raphael has suggested a view that combines both altcoins and Bitcoin (the best answer):

“I believe short-mid term it‘ll be shifting in phases, like we saw the last 12 months, from high BTC dominance to high Altcoin dominance, then returning to Bitcoin. This cycle could end in my opinion, mainly due to two things: 1) Altcoins, tokens and blockchain projects will mature and get more and more use cases, a better usability and adoption, forcing the whole market cap to grow, but proportionally more into Altcoins. 2) A lot of projects fail, erasing a big chunk of speculative market value, which would pour back into Bitcoin, due to the „store of value“ narrative, next to Gold and others. Before one of these things will happen, imho there‘ll be a cyclic back and forth, traders riding the market waves, looking for better returns then Bitcoin and it’s already relatively high marketcap. But I would think over time this just gets less and less, BTC will be like a slowly accumulating sponge. 😄”

Cdin on Reddit (hey, @xkr4dx 👀) has played the role of a Bitcoin advocate:

“Sure, bitcoin COULD be supplanted, so could the petrodollar — but the consequences would be so far reaching as to completely alter the landscape we live in. There could be a massive shakeup of this sort, and we may see it in our lifetime. Fiat pairs will come, but the bottom line is this : BTC has massive hashpower(security), market share and “brand visibility” just like petrodollar has the opec nations and everyone using it as a main trade hub. Anyone who wants to replace BTC, should try and “create a replacement fiat” for USD — one COULD but it is going to be a big stretch to get people to take/value them. as far as a backbone to the crypto finance system, I think BTC is it for the forseeable future, with dominance shifts back and forth as new players enter the market, or the altcoin markets go up/down in reference to BTC. but I think overall dominance will remain w/BTC for the forseeable future.”

Rexovas added more scepticism about the “next Bitcoin”:

“If they plan on replacing BTC, I think they’ll fail. Bitcoin has stood the test of time, it is the longest and most secure Blockchain in the world on account of it’s massive hashpower. This is not something that can be easily supplanted. That’s why I think it will succeed in becoming the “gold” of cryptoassets. Surely there can be other cryptocurrencies used in commerce here and there, but I don’t think any of them will come close to BTC in market share. A friend of mine once kept asking, since it’s open source, why we couldn’t just create our own “BTC”. I tried explaining to him that the value is in the security of the network, which is a factor of the mining hashpower — and he just didn’t get it. I explained, he can create his own BTC all he wants. It will die.”

This question caused a bit of a debate, join the Telegram chat for more and be ready to defend your views!

Will SEC accept ETF Bitcoin license? What effects may it have if it will and what if it won’t?

Rexovas has presented a coherent narrative in a Twitter thread (the best answer):

1/3) It’s possible the SEC might approve the VanEck/SolidX/CBOE ETF based on a number of differentiating factors separating it from other filings. A high minimum investment cost, a pricing methodology less susceptible to influence from exchange manipulation, custody/insurance. 2/3) In the event the ETF is approved, they’ll certainly be some upward movement in the market as a whole (though I don’t think it unlikely we might experience additional downturns following such movement), though I’d expect real movement once the ETF actually trades. (3/3) In the event the filing is not approved, I don’t think this necessarily is a bad thing for the market. It would likely only delay the inevitable, and is a reasonable action by regulators that might wish to see exchange price manipulation (wash trading, etc.) curbed first.

And what is your view?

Join the conversation, the next question is coming up on Facebook on Friday, 24 August at 1 PM UTC.