4 ms·

The issue is whether there's any real competitive value to Bitcoin et al - or if it's simply driven by its financial incentive structure, MLM scheme - and if th

by loceng 6y ago

The issue is whether there's any real competitive value to Bitcoin et al - or if it's simply driven by its financial incentive structure, MLM scheme - and if there's a better option, where it isn't financial gain that leads to alignment/consensus, but instead actual consensus - arguably a blockchain structured and decided by democratically elected governments, designing in whatever failsafes are necessary, save regulatory capture for those who want to unnecessarily and unreasonably transfer wealth to themselves from the greater society they're currently attempting to lead into adopting the status quo incumbent(s); the energy consumption is a arguably moot point and a distraction from the important conversation(s) to be having.

alfl 6y ago
I think bitcoin is a classic "worse is better" disruptive innovation. There are arguably better blockchain/blockdag implementations now, but it has a huge first-mover advantage and name recognition, which are important economic features of Bitcoin. As a value store it is arguably a hedge against M2 inflation, which is wildly out of control right now. All sources of perceived growth are absorbing funds like mad in an attempt to outrace the growth of the money supply. So: is there a "better" option -- depends on the dimensions along which "better" has utility. I think there's a value in trustless value exchange, there's a value in the brand of Bitcoin, and a value in trying to hedge central bank M2 inflation. I am a big believer in blockchain/blockdag smart contracts as a future implementation of the capital allocation function of government, especially if the implementation includes a national currency. Built-in taxation through demurrage, funding of proposals voted on and executed automatically as a smart contract, fully auditable and transparent operations -- there are a lot of technical, societal benefits. I agree that energy consumption is largely a moot point.
- loceng 6y ago
  " I think there's a value in trustless value exchange" There are huge pitfalls to "trustless" value exchange, e.g. you can't implement policy like Magnitsky Act - to through economic means "attack" known bad actors, to try to incentivize them financially to play well before it becomes physical.

by loceng 6y ago

alfl 6y ago

I think bitcoin is a classic "worse is better" disruptive innovation. There are arguably better blockchain/blockdag implementations now, but it has a huge first-mover advantage and name recognition, which are important economic features of Bitcoin. As a value store it is arguably a hedge against M2 inflation, which is wildly out of control right now. All sources of perceived growth are absorbing funds like mad in an attempt to outrace the growth of the money supply. So: is there a "better" option -- depends on the dimensions along which "better" has utility. I think there's a value in trustless value exchange, there's a value in the brand of Bitcoin, and a value in trying to hedge central bank M2 inflation. I am a big believer in blockchain/blockdag smart contracts as a future implementation of the capital allocation function of government, especially if the implementation includes a national currency. Built-in taxation through demurrage, funding of proposals voted on and executed automatically as a smart contract, fully auditable and transparent operations -- there are a lot of technical, societal benefits. I agree that energy consumption is largely a moot point.

loceng 6y ago
" I think there's a value in trustless value exchange" There are huge pitfalls to "trustless" value exchange, e.g. you can't implement policy like Magnitsky Act - to through economic means "attack" known bad actors, to try to incentivize them financially to play well before it becomes physical.