​A warm take on the blockchain trilemma.

This isn't a hot take, but it is above room temperature.

Let's call it a warm take.

So, for those of you playing at home, there's this thing called the 'blockchain trilemma,' which basically asks if it's possible for a single blockchain project to be:

• Secure (un-hackable)

• Scalable (able to handle millions/billions of users)

• ​Decentralized (i.e. no one person or collective entity can control the system)

It's something that crypto die-hards love to theorize on and debate.

There's never been a project that has met all three criteria (at the very best they've met two) - for example:

Bitcoin is highly secure and decentralized, but it can only process seven transactions per second (which is way too slow to support billions of users).

Here's the thing: it doesn't matter.

More specifically, it doesn't matter if it's one blockchain solving the trilemma, or a combination of blockchains working in unison to solve it.

As long as it's a seamless experience for the end user - no one is going to care how it works.

Just look at Bitcoin - its slow transaction times have been solved by the Lightning Network, a 'layer 2' that allows users to send BTC in the blink of an eye, for 4 cents a pop (regardless of whether you're send $1 or $1B).

That's a huge deal when you compare it to any other Web2 payment system.

As long as the Bitcoin Network and Lightning Network (which each run as separate systems) feel one and the same to the end user - we're good!