4 ms·

we all know what supply and demand are, and i understand the basics of crypto currency. The question is, can forks of Bitcoin provide that utility in a signifi

we all know what supply and demand are, and i understand the basics of crypto currency. The question is, can forks of Bitcoin provide that utility in a significantly better way Thats not really the question is it? It's not about better utility. It's about where you can unload the currency and for what/how much. It's not about usefulness it's ultimately about money. Real money. Bitcoins are only valuable in a world where there use is necessary. I wish I could bold that on HN, NECESSARY. Without the necessity any normal consumer would use a more convenient, less volatile system. Lets shift for a sec. Think about the silk road marketplace. What they should really do is come out with a bitcoin clone of their own, get a bunch of early adopters behind it and then switch the website over to only accept their crypto currency. The'd rake in the cash and have a pile of it on hand from getting in early. They'd be selling the currency and the products you buy with it. The worlds best drug dealers. In fact theres no telling whether the bitcoin early adopters are involved in this very practice at silk road. It's not about beating bitcoin in usefullness, it's about real money. Also, most currencies favor early adopters, even (especially) gold and silver. I don't think that's really anything new Gold and silver don't compare. They're not currency, they're commodities that have actual use and value outside the realm of wealth exchange, and they didn't favor early adopters(thousands of years ago). That comparison holds little to no value and frankly I'm growing rather tired of people pretending like it does.

wmf 15y ago
It's not about better utility. It's about where you can unload the currency and for what/how much. This sounds like the Bitcoin-as-investment thinking that produced the bubble. Imagine a fork of Bitcoin that clears transactions faster, has less volatility, and has a better GUI; would you still judge it only on its exchange rate?
- fish2000 15y ago
  _would you still judge it only on its exchange rate?_ the idea is that the market will judge it on the features you enumerated (GUI/settling speed/volatility) and the exchange rate will reflect that, n'est ce pas?
jerguismi 15y ago
> Lets shift for a sec. Think about the silk road marketplace. What they should really do is come out with a bitcoin clone of their own, get a bunch of early adopters behind it and then switch the website over to only accept their crypto currency. The'd rake in the cash and have a pile of it on hand from getting in early. They'd be selling the currency and the products you buy with it. The worlds best drug dealers. In fact theres no telling whether the bitcoin early adopters are involved in this very practice at silk road. It's not about beating bitcoin in usefullness, it's about real money. It is not only about the new blockchain, it is the infrastructure built around it. Currently bitcoin is the cryptocurrency which is easiest to use and has most infrastructure. If you want to start your own drug market for a new cryptocurrency, you have to setup exchanges etc. too for it.
SkyMarshal 15y ago
>we all know what supply and demand are Of course, but it's worth mentioning here b/c people don't normally apply it to money. >Thats not really the question is it? It's not about better utility. It's about where you can unload the currency and for what/how much. For what and/or how much you can exchange the currency is a function of the level of trust in the currency, which is a function of the general demand for it, which is a function of several things - utility, soundness of the algorithm and system implementation, size of the network, etc. All these factor into its value. At any one time, different factors may be weighted differently by market participants, but those weights and the resulting market values can and do change. >It's not about usefulness it's ultimately about money. Real money. What is real money exactly? >Gold and silver don't compare. They're not currency Considering that gold and silver have been currencies for most of recorded human history, until just the past ~80 years, I beg to differ. But I wasn't attempting a strong 'comparison' there anyway, just a tangential observation.

wmf 15y ago

It's not about better utility. It's about where you can unload the currency and for what/how much. This sounds like the Bitcoin-as-investment thinking that produced the bubble. Imagine a fork of Bitcoin that clears transactions faster, has less volatility, and has a better GUI; would you still judge it only on its exchange rate?

fish2000 15y ago
_would you still judge it only on its exchange rate?_ the idea is that the market will judge it on the features you enumerated (GUI/settling speed/volatility) and the exchange rate will reflect that, n'est ce pas?

jerguismi 15y ago

> Lets shift for a sec. Think about the silk road marketplace. What they should really do is come out with a bitcoin clone of their own, get a bunch of early adopters behind it and then switch the website over to only accept their crypto currency. The'd rake in the cash and have a pile of it on hand from getting in early. They'd be selling the currency and the products you buy with it. The worlds best drug dealers. In fact theres no telling whether the bitcoin early adopters are involved in this very practice at silk road. It's not about beating bitcoin in usefullness, it's about real money. It is not only about the new blockchain, it is the infrastructure built around it. Currently bitcoin is the cryptocurrency which is easiest to use and has most infrastructure. If you want to start your own drug market for a new cryptocurrency, you have to setup exchanges etc. too for it.

SkyMarshal 15y ago

>we all know what supply and demand are Of course, but it's worth mentioning here b/c people don't normally apply it to money. >Thats not really the question is it? It's not about better utility. It's about where you can unload the currency and for what/how much. For what and/or how much you can exchange the currency is a function of the level of trust in the currency, which is a function of the general demand for it, which is a function of several things - utility, soundness of the algorithm and system implementation, size of the network, etc. All these factor into its value. At any one time, different factors may be weighted differently by market participants, but those weights and the resulting market values can and do change. >It's not about usefulness it's ultimately about money. Real money. What is real money exactly? >Gold and silver don't compare. They're not currency Considering that gold and silver have been currencies for most of recorded human history, until just the past ~80 years, I beg to differ. But I wasn't attempting a strong 'comparison' there anyway, just a tangential observation.