1: You need to download and install software to use current cryptocurrencies. And users hate that.
2: Turning Fiat into Bitcoin and vica versa is not easy.
3: It is less private then cash.
4: Volatility of the value. Users would want something pegged to their currency of choice.
People already trust companies with their money. If banks supported crypto natively the no-install/web app model works great. The last three points are rendered irrelevant here if banks are able to make the experience easy and guarantee some value.
Those who don't want the protection of a bank are trading off points 1/2/4 for point 3.
Users don't have a problem installing apps on their phone.
The rest are valid problems, with #2 and #4 being directly linked to low adoption.
Web pages and browser extensions are pretty low barrier to entry.
Exchanging cost is not too bad, but probably the biggest hurdle still.
Privacy I don't think is a problem here. One random address to another is good enough for these type of transactions.
Pegging to another currency means centralization, though that is acceptable to plenty of people.
You said you wished there was a solution, all I'm saying is there is a clear path to how it could be done.
> Also by increasing the size of the blocks you increase the orphan rate due to propagation delay which results in needing more confirmations before a transaction is considered truly immutable.
Which happens at around 20 MB. Improvements like Graphene, Xthinner and blocktorrent will drastically reduce the orphan rate allowing for much bigger blocks to be propagated fast enough for the orphan rates to not climb in a relevant fashion.
> Bitcoin has to have a fee market to incentivize miners so that as block rewards decrease the cost of securing the network doesn't shrink as well.
Or Bitcoin needs many more lower fee transactions to compensate. In a couple of decades.
Cash Shuffle and Cash Fusion will also provide the privacy needed for users to safely enjoy Bitcoin Cash.