6 ms·
Digital fiat currency also does not require traditional armies or physical vaults. Digital fiat and crypto both require armies of cybersecurity geeks and "vaul
by enduser 4y ago
Digital fiat currency also does not require traditional armies or physical vaults.
Digital fiat and crypto both require armies of cybersecurity geeks and "vaults" of servers participating in the network.
I don't see your point.
- adventured 4y agoThey all require militaries with guns to protect them, to the extent they're worth anything of consequence. Obvious, exaggerated example to prove the point: Ukraine is the center of the Bitcoin universe. Every computer that powers the Bitcoin network resides in Ukraine. Does Bitcoin require a military to protect it or not? I guess the electronic stock exchange systems of the US don't require a military to ultimately protect them either according to that premise. Bitcoin is also a physical asset in the end, because it can't exist without the hardware. It's exceptionally obvious that you have to protect the hardware with a military (both the ability to defend and respond if need be, to an attack). This is particularly an issue if you're going to build an economy around it, or otherwise allow Bitcoin & Co. to become a supersized asset class (such that your economy could be severely damaged if that asset class is severely damaged). Oh hey there Latvia, your domestic systems are holding $13 trillion worth of Bitcoin (which has become the globally dominant asset). You're the Switzerland of the Baltics. No need to protect your systems with guns, don't worry about it, you don't need a military for that, because Bitcoin is magical pixie dust that only exists in the digital realm. Oh whoops, the digital realm exists on physical hardware (that someone somewhere has to protect with guns).