4 ms·

I completely understand your point, and I agree with you: people that come in the community during FOMO times (such as 2017 and probably 2021) are not adding a

I completely understand your point, and I agree with you: people that come in the community during FOMO times (such as 2017 and probably 2021) are not adding a lot of value to the community itself (because they are not here for the "good" reason). However the goal of this article is not to speculate on the price. It's to give legitimate lower/upper bounds of where Bitcoin could be in 10 years if it is successful. I'm not saying it will reach the $1M price point. I'm saying "If it does not fail, it could go there". As you point out, there is still a non-zero probability that it fails and goes back to 0.

sebmellen 6y ago
Fair point, and it was interesting to learn about MZM Money supply, which I wasn't aware of. I really hope we reach some platonic ideal of decentralization and decentralized value in the future. However, I'm not sure that Bitcoin is the right vehicle for this, or that price targets are a good way to measure these developments. Advancements that make microloans easier to access for farmers in Peru or land ownership verifiable in rural Zambia are worth more to me than a lumbering deflationary asset class like Bitcoin. I also think this was the original "Satoshi vision," and having been in this space since before the hype started, it saddens me to see everything focused around price. IMO, price is a good measure only when it actually represents value created, and not speculation. On an unrelated note, I like what you're doing with hook.vc! I'd be interested to get your feedback on a project I'm working on for decentralized scientific publishing. (Especially given that you've been through the academic/PhD pipeline.) Do you have an email?
- kprimice 6y ago
  I agree with your points. Price is definitely not the best metric to measure Bitcoin adoption (especially because its price is manipulated...). I think Bitcoin as its own use cases (store of value and medium of exchange), and won't be use for everything in the future. Other technologies have to be developed for other application (and that's what ETH and co are all about). Thanks for your interest in Hook. Of course, you can reach out to me on kevin@hook.vc ;)

sebmellen 6y ago

Fair point, and it was interesting to learn about MZM Money supply, which I wasn't aware of. I really hope we reach some platonic ideal of decentralization and decentralized value in the future. However, I'm not sure that Bitcoin is the right vehicle for this, or that price targets are a good way to measure these developments. Advancements that make microloans easier to access for farmers in Peru or land ownership verifiable in rural Zambia are worth more to me than a lumbering deflationary asset class like Bitcoin. I also think this was the original "Satoshi vision," and having been in this space since before the hype started, it saddens me to see everything focused around price. IMO, price is a good measure only when it actually represents value created, and not speculation. On an unrelated note, I like what you're doing with hook.vc! I'd be interested to get your feedback on a project I'm working on for decentralized scientific publishing. (Especially given that you've been through the academic/PhD pipeline.) Do you have an email?

kprimice 6y ago
I agree with your points. Price is definitely not the best metric to measure Bitcoin adoption (especially because its price is manipulated...). I think Bitcoin as its own use cases (store of value and medium of exchange), and won't be use for everything in the future. Other technologies have to be developed for other application (and that's what ETH and co are all about). Thanks for your interest in Hook. Of course, you can reach out to me on kevin@hook.vc ;)