My contention is that bitcoin can never succeed as a transactional currency, because as Satoshi noted and David Marcus belatedly concedes it has no intrinsic value - it is BOTHA
That you apply "never" is the absolute point I made earlier of your inability to grasp concepts of fundamental change that may be occurring.
So you could be entirely right in your beliefs and shown to be so at some unidentified, unspecified date in the future, beyond medium term future (is that 5-10yrs), perhaps?
But even if bitcoin does not succeed as a transactional currency, does that preclude it from succeeding as something else?
Perhaps, perhaps not.
The Libra White Paper and associated Marcus commentary really is an eye opener. It doesn't single out btc for criticism but lists its obvious (fatal in my view) deficiencies.
So are you advocating what Marcus is saying, involved in?
You recommended the Libra White Paper to read, you are now sayings it is an "eye-opener".
Does the Libra project hold value? You mentioned that it could in developing countries, but you could not see a usage for it in developed countries.
I can only take from that, that you accept the Libra project holds some, prospective value at least? If not for you, but for others?