Well there s a lot that is objectionable in the article, in fact it's probably pretty bad for Taleb (it's also not peer-reviewed). The premise of the article is

Well there s a lot that is objectionable in the article, in fact it's probably pretty bad for Taleb (it's also not peer-reviewed). The premise of the article is absolutist " does not constitute, not even remotely, a safe haven for one’s investments, a shield against government tyranny, or a tail protection vehicle for catastrophic episodes". This seems hard to prove, while the criticism is certainly warranted. The author forgets that Aluminum used to be more expensive than Gold, and this can happen to gold too, so the present value of Gold must also be $0? Bitcoin is certainly not a conventional currency , nor completely digital gold, it's different. But i think the author brushes aside the sociological argument for Bitcoin. The cause of bitcoin is generational: Each generation wants to create its bubble, to nourish it and benefit from it as they get older. For boomers there was real estate, for gen-x'ers there was entrepreneurship, for the next generations there is nothing but a future where their productivity is eaten up trying to sustain giant government sectors, pension funds and real estate bubbles, which leaves them with no wealth[1]. Bitcoin sidesteps that, allowing them to create a bubble that is fully their own. That's why bitcoin (or a replacement cryptocurrency) will persist for decades. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/12/03/precariousness-modern-young-adulthood-one-chart/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/12/03/precariou...