12 ms·

I still don't get why I would want to hold a bitcoin for anything other than speculation. If I want some form of currency to actually use there are plenty of le

I still don't get why I would want to hold a bitcoin for anything other than speculation. If I want some form of currency to actually use there are plenty of less volatile options.

spacemanspiff01 2y ago
My view is that it can never be used as a currency because it is inherently deflationary.
- clementmas 2y ago
  Genuine question: why is that? Is inflation required?
  - psychlops 2y ago
    Not at all, but it's a dominant view for a variety of reasons. A base concept is to keep money moving into other investments and discourage saving. I suspect the ongoing inflation rates will make this view less attractive in the future.
  - halfcat 2y ago
    Not required, but a deflationary asset used as currency discourages borrowing, and companies and governments love borrowing. If you knew that inflation was going to rapidly increase, the smartest thing you could do would be to take out as many loans as you can and buy usable assets, like a car and a warehouse full of canned beans. Imagine you take out a loan to buy a car. Tomorrow, hyperinflation happens and the currency has lost 99% of its value. You can now pay off your car with a can of beans. Inflation is also an avenue for a government to steal the excess value produced by an economy over time. Probably just a coincidence though.
    - whimsicalism 2y ago
      It does not, in an ideal economic scenario, discourage borrowing - it just means nominal interest rates might be negative.
    - the_gastropod 2y ago
      > Inflation is also an avenue for a government to steal the excess value produced by an economy over time What's the incentive here? "The government" (unless we're talking monarchies or dictatorships?) usually isn't some monolithic, self-interested entity capable of benefiting from things like "stealing" via inflation. Who's the evil mustache-twister behind all this? The way this is usually trotted out makes it sound like Nancy Pelosi—because there's almost always a Nancy Pelosi hot take—is siphoning $20's out of IRS revenue streams, and laughing her way to the bank.
      - Ferret7446 2y ago
        It lets you increase taxes without actually increasing taxes. People get upset when you increase taxes (sometimes upset enough to create their own country), but less so when you increase the money supply a little bit.
      - halfcat 2y ago
        By moving the goal posts of how CPI is calculated, the government can take in more, or pay out less. Social security, Medicare, etc are indexed to inflation. Tax brackets are indexed to inflation. So when the government needs more money, it can create it by paying less to elderly, poor, and sick people, or taking more taxes without the population aware. There are better ways of calculating inflation. But they allow less shenanigans. You know what would really make it hard to siphon money off to a black budget project, or to the business of a politician’s brother-in-law that gets the contract? A deflationary asset where there’s a cryptographically secure immutable ledger of all transactions.
        the_gastropod 2y ago
        > You know what would really make it hard to siphon money off to a black budget project, or to the business of a politician’s brother-in-law that gets the contract? A deflationary asset where there’s a cryptographically secure immutable ledger of all transactions. I’m not sure how Bitcoin is simultaneously completely transparent, bringing daylight to big bad government fraud and also a privacy-protecting, regulatory circumvention tool. These things seem at odds. If scam artists and criminals can obfuscate their transactions sufficiently to avoid being tracked down, I’m confident any half-competent government could do the same for its black budget spending.
  - dools 2y ago
    If you were to choose between a little bit of inflation and a little bit of deflation, you should choose a little bit of inflation. Deflation means people have a greater incentive not to spend, so dissuades investment and thus innovation and progress. It leads to wealth hoarding and feudalism.
- cypress66 2y ago
  Gold was used as a currency for ages, and it's similar to bitcoin (limited amount with a bit of gold being mined every year)
  - dools 2y ago
    When currency was made using gold/silver it was also deflationary, which was a fucking nightmare for everyone except the very rich.
    - monero-xmr 2y ago
      Working people could save money in a currency that didn’t inflate. If you start looking for signs of Bitcoin, you see them everywhere. Every convenience store near me has the option to buy BTC with a crypto ATM or point of sale system. It’s far easier for someone with some extra cash to buy crypto than stocks.
      - dools 2y ago
        What you're talking about is using money to buy a commodity as an investment. If the currency WERE the commodity, and assuming a deflationary environment, working people would find they would have a decreasing share of the currency to begin with. In other words, the reason working people currently have enough money to buy BTC as an investment, is that they are using a non-deflationary currency. Also note that buying stocks is only marginally more difficult than opening a bank account, and investing in major index funds via ETFs is almost as good as a term deposit (with minimal long term risk of realising a loss UNLESS you are forced to access the money at some time relatively soon after purchasing). After you have created the account, buying more is easier than using a BTC ATM. Given the risk of a) BTC going to 0 and b) being scammed and/or otherwise losing all of your BTC I'd say everday people are much, much better off putting their money in index funds.
    - Ferret7446 2y ago
      > which was a fucking nightmare for everyone except the very rich Citation needed.
- hanniabu 2y ago
  It is not deflationary, where are you even getting this from?
  - saxonww 2y ago
    This post. There's I think supposed to only ever be 21 million bitcoin. Bitcoin rewards for mining halve every ~4 years. Eventually they will stop; there will be no new bitcoin. People will also lose bitcoin; this already happens. Famously, no one knows where ~1m bitcoin supposedly mined by Satoshi are, they are assumed to be permanently out of circulation. So not only is there a cap on maximum bitcoin, and over time less new bitcoin will be injected into circulation, existing bitcoin will also be removed from circulation over time. This presents a strong incentive to hold bitcoin instead of spending it, since scarce assets become more valuable with increased scarcity. If a bitcoin is likely to be worth more tomorrow than it is today, you're less likely to spend it. Which has the compound effect of reducing bitcoin in circulation further. This is why people say it's deflationary.
    - hanniabu 2y ago
      That's the most laughable thing I've read in a while Also ethereum is actually deflationary now without relying on people losing their keys (and being excited about that)
arandomusername 2y ago
Can't be taken away from you / frozen. Which isn't a problem for most if they have multiple bank accounts, but for some controversial figures it can be essential.
- jsjohnst 2y ago
  > Can't be taken away from you / frozen. Then explain why the US government has confiscated so much of it.
  - px43 2y ago
    Because they gained physical access to the machines holding the coins? Surely you understand the difference there right? If all of your money is being held by random companies, it's not really your money is it? Cryptocurrencies give you all the autonomy of cash, while still allowing you to send it to anyone over the internet.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - jsjohnst 2y ago
      > Because they gained physical access That’s the very definition of “taken” isn’t it?
      - mlrtime 2y ago
        Get a wallet, store the phrase in your head, how are they going to get physical access?
        jsjohnst 2y ago
        Inject you with some sodium thiopental and then further use a $5 wrench as needed for motivation. ;)
hugs 2y ago
Spending tiny amounts using Bitcoin's Lightning Network for digital (SaaS) services is something I'm exploring. It's an interesting application when you need an international payment system for settling cross-border payments. (I'm not a fintech expert, but like I said, I'm exploring the possibilities...) When something costs only a few cents (sats in Bitcoin-speak), the variability of the full price of one Bitcoin is minimal. And when something is a few cents, the transaction fees using any other method makes the whole idea hard to imagine. tl;dr: international payments for digital goods using the Lightning Network is (arguably) a valid use for Bitcoin that is not speculation.
- robryan 2y ago
  For accepting crypto payments wouldn't I be better off accepting a stable coin? Most companies I saw in the past were nominally accepting crypto but going through a service that would just pay out the USD equivalent. I guess with software margins there is a bit more room to move with price fluctuations. For ecommerce though accepting and holding a currency that moves this much could quickly erode the smaller margins.
  - hugs 2y ago
    The idea I'm looking into is for a high margin thing that can absorb price fluctuations. Re: stablecoins, I did notice that one of the YC Request for Startups was for stablecoin-focused startups, but I don't have a strong opinion about stablecoins, yet. https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs#stablecoin-finance https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs#stablecoin-finance
block_dagger 2y ago
One situation is if you live in a country with highly inflationary currency, it's a hedge against loss of value even in the short term. This argument goes for any inflationary currency, including USD, in the long term. This stems from Bitcoin's inherent design of provably predictable scarcity.
- robryan 2y ago
  Yeah it is fair to say it depends on the choices someone has. If I can stick USD into a high interest savings account though it seems like a much safer way to keep value.
- RivieraKid 2y ago
  If it's possible to buy Bitcoin in such a country, I would assume it would be possible to buy dollars, bonds or stocks. But maybe not. My guess is that inflation-protection in a 3rd world country is only a very minor reason for Bitcoin ownership, i.e. the vast majority of Bitcoins are owned for different reasons. Which has implications for its future price.
  - rokkitmensch 2y ago
    Relatives can buy btc stateside and relay it to you with pretty much no interference from local tax authorities or sanctions regimes. There's value in this, Americans who are long America just hate admitting it.
    - MadnessASAP 2y ago
      So, the thing is, that's not actually a feature.
      - arandomusername 2y ago
        What next, privacy in tor is not a feature too? Greatest heist of the century is the government convincing people that they don't need financial freedom and privacy.
shimonabi 2y ago
People have always loved gambling. Crypto is nothing but a game of musical chairs. Also, smart people fall into cults like everyone else but they tell themselves they are into it for rational reasons (techology).
- halfcat 2y ago
  Do you have any criticism to offer as to why BTC isn’t viable? I’d love to be convinced. If I hear a single convincing argument I’ll beat that drum all day alongside you. But all you’ve given is: - gambling exists - “musical chairs” - cults exist So, hand-waving. Help me out here.
  - dools 2y ago
    It has no underlying fundamentals. Its value is 100% speculative. Gold is somewhat similar, in that it's value is mostly speculative, but it does have some inherent utility/value. Bitcoin has value for the same reason that vintage sneakers or Pokemon cards have value; that is there is a fetish for them and thus some belief that at some later time, someone will want to buy it for personal reasons (either due to their own beliefs or sentimentality). Actual currency, on the other hand, derives its value from the willingness of the issuing sovereign to accept it back in payment of taxes.
    - halfcat 2y ago
      Fiat doesn’t hold value because it has fundamentals or inherent utility either. Fiat currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with guns. Crypto currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with encryption.
      - dools 2y ago
        > Fiat currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with guns. Yep that's what I said: payment of taxes. > Crypto currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with encryption. I disagree. There is no reason for bitcoin to hold its value. Miners expend real resources (which they pay for) to obtain bitcoin because they speculate that someone will pay more for it further down the line. People buy bitcoin for the same reason. The price of bitcoin could go to zero without any compromise of the underlying encryption. The purchasing power of a currency issued by a soevereign can only go to zero as a result of the collapse of sovereignty (ie. no more guns, or being outgunned). This is the very definition of hyper inflation in terms of a currency: when a government cannot provision itself in exchange for that currency.
psychlops 2y ago
Hard to say why you would hold bitcoin. If I were to guess, it sounds like you live in an area that has had a safe currency for a long time and the prospects for your currency look good in the future. Otherwise, you would have a different view or at least understand why.
- robryan 2y ago
  Yeah that is fair, it depends on the options available to someone.
lowkey 2y ago
The primary argument for holding bitcoin is as a store of purchasing power to counter every government and central banks addiction to printing money. The economic theory is that money printing is the primary cause of inflation and bitcoin, as the first purely fungible commodity with a fixed total supply that is perfectly inelastic to demand, is an ideal hedge against inflation. Imagine if gold went up 100x in price. New gold mines would be opened. People would come forward with their gold jewelry, etc which would increase the supply of gold. If bitcoin goes up 100x, it’s supply cap and inflation rate would remain unchanged. If you believe the government or central banks will stop printing money, then the argument for bitcoin collapses.
latchkey 2y ago
This answer might not be applicable to you, but it is one of my favorites: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26238410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26238410
yashg 2y ago
There is no other use. Bitcoin is only for gamblers and criminals.
- teh_infallible 2y ago
  So, Blackrock and Fidelity?
  - Ekaros 2y ago
    Yes. They are in essence gamblers. Or at least in business of extracting money from gamblers.
tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
It's not holding but using, but remittances (or in general, money transfers between places where at least one end isn't well connected to the international banking system) are one use case. Instead of finding a company active on both ends (which will have to be a major company like Western Union, with major fees), you can find two separate (potentially local and small, think "coner store money exchanger") entities to get fiat (regular) currency into Bitcoin on one end and out of Bitcoin on the other end. If there is no single company that does business at both your source and destination location/community, there's a good chance you're out of luck. You have to trust those two exchangers to not defraud you, but these two don't need to trust, or even know, each other. Of course, other cryptocurrencies, stablecoins etc. would also work for this, but network effect means Bitcoin is the coin where you're most likely to find participants on both ends.
npoc 2y ago
Speculation of what? That it'll become the main world reserve asset and suck in all the stored value in the world like a black hole? Then, you're bang on - that's the only reason I hold it.

I still don't get why I would want to hold a bitcoin for anything other than speculation. If I want some form of currency to actually use there are plenty of less volatile options.

spacemanspiff01 2y ago

My view is that it can never be used as a currency because it is inherently deflationary.

clementmas 2y ago
Genuine question: why is that? Is inflation required?
- psychlops 2y ago
  Not at all, but it's a dominant view for a variety of reasons. A base concept is to keep money moving into other investments and discourage saving. I suspect the ongoing inflation rates will make this view less attractive in the future.
- halfcat 2y ago
  Not required, but a deflationary asset used as currency discourages borrowing, and companies and governments love borrowing. If you knew that inflation was going to rapidly increase, the smartest thing you could do would be to take out as many loans as you can and buy usable assets, like a car and a warehouse full of canned beans. Imagine you take out a loan to buy a car. Tomorrow, hyperinflation happens and the currency has lost 99% of its value. You can now pay off your car with a can of beans. Inflation is also an avenue for a government to steal the excess value produced by an economy over time. Probably just a coincidence though.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    It does not, in an ideal economic scenario, discourage borrowing - it just means nominal interest rates might be negative.
  - the_gastropod 2y ago
    > Inflation is also an avenue for a government to steal the excess value produced by an economy over time What's the incentive here? "The government" (unless we're talking monarchies or dictatorships?) usually isn't some monolithic, self-interested entity capable of benefiting from things like "stealing" via inflation. Who's the evil mustache-twister behind all this? The way this is usually trotted out makes it sound like Nancy Pelosi—because there's almost always a Nancy Pelosi hot take—is siphoning $20's out of IRS revenue streams, and laughing her way to the bank.
    - Ferret7446 2y ago
      It lets you increase taxes without actually increasing taxes. People get upset when you increase taxes (sometimes upset enough to create their own country), but less so when you increase the money supply a little bit.
    - halfcat 2y ago
      By moving the goal posts of how CPI is calculated, the government can take in more, or pay out less. Social security, Medicare, etc are indexed to inflation. Tax brackets are indexed to inflation. So when the government needs more money, it can create it by paying less to elderly, poor, and sick people, or taking more taxes without the population aware. There are better ways of calculating inflation. But they allow less shenanigans. You know what would really make it hard to siphon money off to a black budget project, or to the business of a politician’s brother-in-law that gets the contract? A deflationary asset where there’s a cryptographically secure immutable ledger of all transactions.
      - the_gastropod 2y ago
        > You know what would really make it hard to siphon money off to a black budget project, or to the business of a politician’s brother-in-law that gets the contract? A deflationary asset where there’s a cryptographically secure immutable ledger of all transactions. I’m not sure how Bitcoin is simultaneously completely transparent, bringing daylight to big bad government fraud and also a privacy-protecting, regulatory circumvention tool. These things seem at odds. If scam artists and criminals can obfuscate their transactions sufficiently to avoid being tracked down, I’m confident any half-competent government could do the same for its black budget spending.
- dools 2y ago
  If you were to choose between a little bit of inflation and a little bit of deflation, you should choose a little bit of inflation. Deflation means people have a greater incentive not to spend, so dissuades investment and thus innovation and progress. It leads to wealth hoarding and feudalism.
cypress66 2y ago
Gold was used as a currency for ages, and it's similar to bitcoin (limited amount with a bit of gold being mined every year)
- dools 2y ago
  When currency was made using gold/silver it was also deflationary, which was a fucking nightmare for everyone except the very rich.
  - monero-xmr 2y ago
    Working people could save money in a currency that didn’t inflate. If you start looking for signs of Bitcoin, you see them everywhere. Every convenience store near me has the option to buy BTC with a crypto ATM or point of sale system. It’s far easier for someone with some extra cash to buy crypto than stocks.
    - dools 2y ago
      What you're talking about is using money to buy a commodity as an investment. If the currency WERE the commodity, and assuming a deflationary environment, working people would find they would have a decreasing share of the currency to begin with. In other words, the reason working people currently have enough money to buy BTC as an investment, is that they are using a non-deflationary currency. Also note that buying stocks is only marginally more difficult than opening a bank account, and investing in major index funds via ETFs is almost as good as a term deposit (with minimal long term risk of realising a loss UNLESS you are forced to access the money at some time relatively soon after purchasing). After you have created the account, buying more is easier than using a BTC ATM. Given the risk of a) BTC going to 0 and b) being scammed and/or otherwise losing all of your BTC I'd say everday people are much, much better off putting their money in index funds.
  - Ferret7446 2y ago
    > which was a fucking nightmare for everyone except the very rich Citation needed.
hanniabu 2y ago
It is not deflationary, where are you even getting this from?
- saxonww 2y ago
  This post. There's I think supposed to only ever be 21 million bitcoin. Bitcoin rewards for mining halve every ~4 years. Eventually they will stop; there will be no new bitcoin. People will also lose bitcoin; this already happens. Famously, no one knows where ~1m bitcoin supposedly mined by Satoshi are, they are assumed to be permanently out of circulation. So not only is there a cap on maximum bitcoin, and over time less new bitcoin will be injected into circulation, existing bitcoin will also be removed from circulation over time. This presents a strong incentive to hold bitcoin instead of spending it, since scarce assets become more valuable with increased scarcity. If a bitcoin is likely to be worth more tomorrow than it is today, you're less likely to spend it. Which has the compound effect of reducing bitcoin in circulation further. This is why people say it's deflationary.
  - hanniabu 2y ago
    That's the most laughable thing I've read in a while Also ethereum is actually deflationary now without relying on people losing their keys (and being excited about that)

arandomusername 2y ago

Can't be taken away from you / frozen. Which isn't a problem for most if they have multiple bank accounts, but for some controversial figures it can be essential.

jsjohnst 2y ago
> Can't be taken away from you / frozen. Then explain why the US government has confiscated so much of it.
- px43 2y ago
  Because they gained physical access to the machines holding the coins? Surely you understand the difference there right? If all of your money is being held by random companies, it's not really your money is it? Cryptocurrencies give you all the autonomy of cash, while still allowing you to send it to anyone over the internet.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - jsjohnst 2y ago
    > Because they gained physical access That’s the very definition of “taken” isn’t it?
    - mlrtime 2y ago
      Get a wallet, store the phrase in your head, how are they going to get physical access?
      - jsjohnst 2y ago
        Inject you with some sodium thiopental and then further use a $5 wrench as needed for motivation. ;)

hugs 2y ago

Spending tiny amounts using Bitcoin's Lightning Network for digital (SaaS) services is something I'm exploring. It's an interesting application when you need an international payment system for settling cross-border payments. (I'm not a fintech expert, but like I said, I'm exploring the possibilities...) When something costs only a few cents (sats in Bitcoin-speak), the variability of the full price of one Bitcoin is minimal. And when something is a few cents, the transaction fees using any other method makes the whole idea hard to imagine. tl;dr: international payments for digital goods using the Lightning Network is (arguably) a valid use for Bitcoin that is not speculation.

robryan 2y ago
For accepting crypto payments wouldn't I be better off accepting a stable coin? Most companies I saw in the past were nominally accepting crypto but going through a service that would just pay out the USD equivalent. I guess with software margins there is a bit more room to move with price fluctuations. For ecommerce though accepting and holding a currency that moves this much could quickly erode the smaller margins.
- hugs 2y ago
  The idea I'm looking into is for a high margin thing that can absorb price fluctuations. Re: stablecoins, I did notice that one of the YC Request for Startups was for stablecoin-focused startups, but I don't have a strong opinion about stablecoins, yet. https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs#stablecoin-finance https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs#stablecoin-finance

block_dagger 2y ago

One situation is if you live in a country with highly inflationary currency, it's a hedge against loss of value even in the short term. This argument goes for any inflationary currency, including USD, in the long term. This stems from Bitcoin's inherent design of provably predictable scarcity.

robryan 2y ago
Yeah it is fair to say it depends on the choices someone has. If I can stick USD into a high interest savings account though it seems like a much safer way to keep value.
RivieraKid 2y ago
If it's possible to buy Bitcoin in such a country, I would assume it would be possible to buy dollars, bonds or stocks. But maybe not. My guess is that inflation-protection in a 3rd world country is only a very minor reason for Bitcoin ownership, i.e. the vast majority of Bitcoins are owned for different reasons. Which has implications for its future price.
- rokkitmensch 2y ago
  Relatives can buy btc stateside and relay it to you with pretty much no interference from local tax authorities or sanctions regimes. There's value in this, Americans who are long America just hate admitting it.
  - MadnessASAP 2y ago
    So, the thing is, that's not actually a feature.
    - arandomusername 2y ago
      What next, privacy in tor is not a feature too? Greatest heist of the century is the government convincing people that they don't need financial freedom and privacy.

shimonabi 2y ago

People have always loved gambling. Crypto is nothing but a game of musical chairs. Also, smart people fall into cults like everyone else but they tell themselves they are into it for rational reasons (techology).

halfcat 2y ago
Do you have any criticism to offer as to why BTC isn’t viable? I’d love to be convinced. If I hear a single convincing argument I’ll beat that drum all day alongside you. But all you’ve given is: - gambling exists - “musical chairs” - cults exist So, hand-waving. Help me out here.
- dools 2y ago
  It has no underlying fundamentals. Its value is 100% speculative. Gold is somewhat similar, in that it's value is mostly speculative, but it does have some inherent utility/value. Bitcoin has value for the same reason that vintage sneakers or Pokemon cards have value; that is there is a fetish for them and thus some belief that at some later time, someone will want to buy it for personal reasons (either due to their own beliefs or sentimentality). Actual currency, on the other hand, derives its value from the willingness of the issuing sovereign to accept it back in payment of taxes.
  - halfcat 2y ago
    Fiat doesn’t hold value because it has fundamentals or inherent utility either. Fiat currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with guns. Crypto currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with encryption.
    - dools 2y ago
      > Fiat currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with guns. Yep that's what I said: payment of taxes. > Crypto currency holds value because it is backed by a sufficiently large group with encryption. I disagree. There is no reason for bitcoin to hold its value. Miners expend real resources (which they pay for) to obtain bitcoin because they speculate that someone will pay more for it further down the line. People buy bitcoin for the same reason. The price of bitcoin could go to zero without any compromise of the underlying encryption. The purchasing power of a currency issued by a soevereign can only go to zero as a result of the collapse of sovereignty (ie. no more guns, or being outgunned). This is the very definition of hyper inflation in terms of a currency: when a government cannot provision itself in exchange for that currency.

psychlops 2y ago

Hard to say why you would hold bitcoin. If I were to guess, it sounds like you live in an area that has had a safe currency for a long time and the prospects for your currency look good in the future. Otherwise, you would have a different view or at least understand why.

robryan 2y ago
Yeah that is fair, it depends on the options available to someone.

lowkey 2y ago

The primary argument for holding bitcoin is as a store of purchasing power to counter every government and central banks addiction to printing money. The economic theory is that money printing is the primary cause of inflation and bitcoin, as the first purely fungible commodity with a fixed total supply that is perfectly inelastic to demand, is an ideal hedge against inflation. Imagine if gold went up 100x in price. New gold mines would be opened. People would come forward with their gold jewelry, etc which would increase the supply of gold. If bitcoin goes up 100x, it’s supply cap and inflation rate would remain unchanged. If you believe the government or central banks will stop printing money, then the argument for bitcoin collapses.

latchkey 2y ago

This answer might not be applicable to you, but it is one of my favorites: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26238410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26238410

yashg 2y ago

There is no other use. Bitcoin is only for gamblers and criminals.

teh_infallible 2y ago
So, Blackrock and Fidelity?
- Ekaros 2y ago
  Yes. They are in essence gamblers. Or at least in business of extracting money from gamblers.

tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago

It's not holding but using, but remittances (or in general, money transfers between places where at least one end isn't well connected to the international banking system) are one use case. Instead of finding a company active on both ends (which will have to be a major company like Western Union, with major fees), you can find two separate (potentially local and small, think "coner store money exchanger") entities to get fiat (regular) currency into Bitcoin on one end and out of Bitcoin on the other end. If there is no single company that does business at both your source and destination location/community, there's a good chance you're out of luck. You have to trust those two exchangers to not defraud you, but these two don't need to trust, or even know, each other. Of course, other cryptocurrencies, stablecoins etc. would also work for this, but network effect means Bitcoin is the coin where you're most likely to find participants on both ends.

npoc 2y ago

Speculation of what? That it'll become the main world reserve asset and suck in all the stored value in the world like a black hole? Then, you're bang on - that's the only reason I hold it.