3 ms·

>3. Bitcoin remains the main store of value I think this is probably right. And I would add 2 things (a) The size and the hash power of BTC give it a HUGE adv

by _red 9y ago

>3. Bitcoin remains the main store of value I think this is probably right. And I would add 2 things (a) The size and the hash power of BTC give it a HUGE advantage. If you want "immutable proof that you own this specific decentralized block" then BTC is the only game in town. And that comes at a cost (hence high fees because of lots of electricity, computers, ASIC fabs, etc). (b) Secondly (and I realize this analogy has been beat to death...but), Gold didn't want Silver to exist. The gold industry naturally wanted to monopolize every transaction, but like Bitcoin, it turned out that their very strengths were also simultaneously their weaknesses. Its an immutable law of economics that BTC isn't going to be able to be all things to all people, so I think its natural that among their various options, they will choose to be the "Store of Value". Ultimately thats the equivalent of being a reserve currency. By capturing the store of value corner, it means that alternatives like ETH, LTC, DASH, IOTA, et al will be valued against and perform a support function to Bitcoin. In a sense, by being the Store of Value, the other cryptos perform support roles that further entrench your position.

pishpash 9y ago
If you owned a national currency, you would have the legal taxing authority and guns behind your papers. If you owned gold, you would have a shiny incorruptible metal in your hand to hand over for industrial if not artistic uses, in a pinch. Heck, even if you owned a potato, you could eat it -- and in dire circumstances that has a huge amount of value and maybe you can convince somebody to trade something else valuable. If you "own" bitcoins, you have some numbers graffitied over people's hard drives. Yes they can't change it because electricity, and the numbers only get so big, and you have some different numbers that can be turned into the graffitied numbers by one particular algorithm that people like at the moment. Without transactions, these properties are completely arbitrary. I don't see how by themselves they can give anything approaching the necessities for a store of value. The truth is, without competitive transactional uses bitcoin has no fundamental value. Without fundamental value it can't be much of a store of value, since literally anything else without fundamental value can be equally good. You can store something like the goodwill of the network, as now, which isn't nothing, but it can be notoriously fickle.

by _red 9y ago

pishpash 9y ago

If you owned a national currency, you would have the legal taxing authority and guns behind your papers. If you owned gold, you would have a shiny incorruptible metal in your hand to hand over for industrial if not artistic uses, in a pinch. Heck, even if you owned a potato, you could eat it -- and in dire circumstances that has a huge amount of value and maybe you can convince somebody to trade something else valuable. If you "own" bitcoins, you have some numbers graffitied over people's hard drives. Yes they can't change it because electricity, and the numbers only get so big, and you have some different numbers that can be turned into the graffitied numbers by one particular algorithm that people like at the moment. Without transactions, these properties are completely arbitrary. I don't see how by themselves they can give anything approaching the necessities for a store of value. The truth is, without competitive transactional uses bitcoin has no fundamental value. Without fundamental value it can't be much of a store of value, since literally anything else without fundamental value can be equally good. You can store something like the goodwill of the network, as now, which isn't nothing, but it can be notoriously fickle.