3 ms·

Imagine if in the real world we would have people come up with new metals to compete with gold, silver, platinum, etc. as viable stores of value. This dilution

by aviv 9y ago

Imagine if in the real world we would have people come up with new metals to compete with gold, silver, platinum, etc. as viable stores of value. This dilution and unlimited supply of cryptocurrency types will not be good for Bitcoin in the long run.

Klathmon 9y ago
>Imagine if in the real world we would have people come up with new metals to compete with gold, silver, platinum, etc. as viable stores of value. Like dollars, euros, pounds, etc...
jstanley 9y ago
What evidence have you seen that suggests this project is remotely a viable store of value?
- scalablenotions 9y ago
  Massive and growing consensus and significant transfer of representative value from FIAT.
DINKDINK 9y ago
Bitcoin's store of value proposition comes from two things. It's controlled issuance schedule and two the hash scarcity from mining. You can clone a coin a million times but you cannot duplicate hash scarcity.
ty_a 9y ago
What you describe is not unlike the coin debasement that occurred during the latter period of the Roman Empire. However, unlike coin debasement, forking a cryptocurrency imposes no requirement to actually use it.
etherael 9y ago
Actually it's an excellent feature of the ecosystem. Consider the old "cross of gold" canard, the accusation is that the economic powers that be were inhibiting cooperation and productive investment by monopolising and artificially controlling the money supply, restricting it to manufacture recessions and flooding it to manufacture booms. The proposed solution was silver backed money at the time, which was vigorously opposed, eventually successfully, by the parties which held control of the gold supply at the time. What if it wasn't just two widely held and distributed elements they had to corner the market on and maintain supply control for, but practically any arbitrary blockchain that someone believes is necessary given the lack of availability in the other forms of money in present circulation. It makes it much harder to manufacture recessions when your target audience can simply mint their own uncensorable high quality cryptocurrency out of widely available code by simply tweaking a few variables to fit their purposes. At the same time it doesn't take away from the value proposition of more established cryptocurrencies, because it is always obvious that these alternative chains are not units of the original currencies from which they were spawned. If people truly are simply trying to pointlessly expand the money supply for no reason, then the market will eventually punish them as that money is used in economically unproductive pursuits. When all is said and done, a blockchain is just a globally available tamperproof digital ledger. And given that territory, you can build any given economy on top of it.

by aviv 9y ago

Klathmon 9y ago

>Imagine if in the real world we would have people come up with new metals to compete with gold, silver, platinum, etc. as viable stores of value. Like dollars, euros, pounds, etc...

jstanley 9y ago

What evidence have you seen that suggests this project is remotely a viable store of value?

scalablenotions 9y ago
Massive and growing consensus and significant transfer of representative value from FIAT.

DINKDINK 9y ago

Bitcoin's store of value proposition comes from two things. It's controlled issuance schedule and two the hash scarcity from mining. You can clone a coin a million times but you cannot duplicate hash scarcity.

ty_a 9y ago

What you describe is not unlike the coin debasement that occurred during the latter period of the Roman Empire. However, unlike coin debasement, forking a cryptocurrency imposes no requirement to actually use it.

etherael 9y ago

Actually it's an excellent feature of the ecosystem. Consider the old "cross of gold" canard, the accusation is that the economic powers that be were inhibiting cooperation and productive investment by monopolising and artificially controlling the money supply, restricting it to manufacture recessions and flooding it to manufacture booms. The proposed solution was silver backed money at the time, which was vigorously opposed, eventually successfully, by the parties which held control of the gold supply at the time. What if it wasn't just two widely held and distributed elements they had to corner the market on and maintain supply control for, but practically any arbitrary blockchain that someone believes is necessary given the lack of availability in the other forms of money in present circulation. It makes it much harder to manufacture recessions when your target audience can simply mint their own uncensorable high quality cryptocurrency out of widely available code by simply tweaking a few variables to fit their purposes. At the same time it doesn't take away from the value proposition of more established cryptocurrencies, because it is always obvious that these alternative chains are not units of the original currencies from which they were spawned. If people truly are simply trying to pointlessly expand the money supply for no reason, then the market will eventually punish them as that money is used in economically unproductive pursuits. When all is said and done, a blockchain is just a globally available tamperproof digital ledger. And given that territory, you can build any given economy on top of it.