4 ms·

(2018) -- so bits of this already seem dated, for instance the idea of a profusion of coins being a feature, not a bug, of the crypto space: > “Think of this a

(2018) -- so bits of this already seem dated, for instance the idea of a profusion of coins being a feature, not a bug, of the crypto space: > “Think of this as an incredibly efficient barter system,” says Harvey. “Barter is generally inefficient, but if you have a network and you tokenize the goods and services and enable it with a blockchain, it can become very efficient.” Maybe I just lack imagination, but I am missing where the benefit of this lies. When Apple has a coin and Toyota has a coin and Kodak has a coin (as seemed would be the case at the time this was published) why is it any better to hold any one of these, barter through a set of intermediaries to get to ConvenienceStoreCoin, and settle your candy purchase with that, versus holding investments, selling them for cash, and using that everywhere? Even putting transaction costs aside, my sense is that a natural, shared unit of account / means of exchange will end up predominating and this "incredibly efficient barter system" won't be the paradigm shift the article implies.

javert 6y ago
You are correct. A good definition of money is "the most liquid good." People want to use the single most liquid good in transactions, for ease of transaction. In other words, good money drives out the bad.
noch 6y ago
> Maybe I just lack imagination, but I am missing where the benefit of this lies. When Apple has a coin and Toyota has a coin and Kodak has a coin (as seemed would be the case at the time this was published) why is it any better to hold any one of these, barter through a set of intermediaries to get to ConvenienceStoreCoin, and settle your candy purchase with that, versus holding investments, selling them for cash, and using that everywhere? These corporate coins, are a form of company scrip. " In the United States, mining and logging camps were typically created, owned and operated by a single company. These locations, some quite remote, were often cash poor; even in ones that were not, workers paid in scrip had little choice but to purchase goods at a company store, as exchange into currency, if even available, would exhaust some of the value via the exchange fee. With this economic monopoly, the employer could place large markups on goods, making workers dependent on the company, thus enforcing employee "loyalty". " https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_scrip https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_scrip

javert 6y ago

You are correct. A good definition of money is "the most liquid good." People want to use the single most liquid good in transactions, for ease of transaction. In other words, good money drives out the bad.

noch 6y ago

> Maybe I just lack imagination, but I am missing where the benefit of this lies. When Apple has a coin and Toyota has a coin and Kodak has a coin (as seemed would be the case at the time this was published) why is it any better to hold any one of these, barter through a set of intermediaries to get to ConvenienceStoreCoin, and settle your candy purchase with that, versus holding investments, selling them for cash, and using that everywhere? These corporate coins, are a form of company scrip. " In the United States, mining and logging camps were typically created, owned and operated by a single company. These locations, some quite remote, were often cash poor; even in ones that were not, workers paid in scrip had little choice but to purchase goods at a company store, as exchange into currency, if even available, would exhaust some of the value via the exchange fee. With this economic monopoly, the employer could place large markups on goods, making workers dependent on the company, thus enforcing employee "loyalty". " https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_scrip https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_scrip