You were downvoted because you are tooting your coin, your argument is weak, and your examples meaningless.
Your argument boils down to: not enough TPS, because bad technology. It's good enough for now and can always be changed later. Changing the distribution of the mempool to miners is trivial. But the game theory consequences (MEV for flash lending) are not. So no one wants to change what is not yet broken until the implications become clear.
> The ability to send or loan arbitrarily large amounts for a fixed fee is a symptom of centralization. In a fully distributed network, transaction fees would have to be proportional to transaction size
With UTXO, there is no correlation between amount and transaction size (cf "dust")
UTXO is just “unspent transaction outputs”. The reason Bitcoin and Ethereum can send transactions of any size for the same fee is because ALL transactions are secured by the entire network, regardless of their size. So they just charge the cost of what a consensus process would take (proof of work, nakamoto consensus in this case) for the entire network to agree on the linear order of that transaction in the sequence. It’s a brute force inefficient approach. Like transporting $1 in the same armored vehicle with a convoy as $1,000,000
You might be able to code something, but clearly have no idea what are talking about and what are desirable properties (which you call inefficient, which I call aligning incentives)
How is it good enough for now, when none of the tokens are actually usable for their intended purpose onchain - and no one uses decentralized crypto systems for everyday payments? Our society relies on centralized server farms run by huge states and corporations and we see the result. Suddenly people care about Big Tech because of Parler and WhatsApp but these are just two blips in a long line of consequences of living in a Feudal society.
WeChat for example is used every day in China and has replaced cash for millions of businesses, and now you have a centralized social credit system, controlled by the Party, and anyone can be blocked at any time, as can those who associate with them. And the digital dollar is coming soon to your neighborhood, which means one account at the central bank, and yes most people will sign up. Meanwhile you’re sitting around saying 10 transactions a second is good enough... this is how the centralized state and corporation wins. When cypherpunks do nothing.
Enjoy living in a world where Facebook and Amazon and your Federal government OWN your identity, data, transactions and let you live as a digital serf under strict supervision.
Can you elaborate? You do realis what everyday payments are, right? Food, clothing, transportation, and so on? Think WeChat in China. Where is this town where people are using Bitcoin on the daily for these things?
Your argument boils down to: not enough TPS, because bad technology. It's good enough for now and can always be changed later. Changing the distribution of the mempool to miners is trivial. But the game theory consequences (MEV for flash lending) are not. So no one wants to change what is not yet broken until the implications become clear.
> The ability to send or loan arbitrarily large amounts for a fixed fee is a symptom of centralization. In a fully distributed network, transaction fees would have to be proportional to transaction size
With UTXO, there is no correlation between amount and transaction size (cf "dust")