3 ms·
A store of value must be such over any given timeframe. If the balance in your savings account is worth $100 today, $50 in three months, $150 in six months, an
by redthrowaway 12y ago
A store of value must be such over any given timeframe. If the balance in your savings account is worth $100 today, $50 in three months, $150 in six months, and $75 in a year, then it is a terrible store of value -- regardless of whether it's worth $200 two years from now.
Similarly, talking about imagined futures is not a convincing way to defend a currency as a store of value. If you have to posit that your money will still be there iff A, B, and C are true, then you're not going to park your money in that particular stall.
- derefr 12y agoI'm not saying people should be putting money into Bitcoin now because they should assume A, B, and C will be true. What I'm saying is that there's no reason to assume that you won't see Bitcoin's value stabilize e.g. ten years from now, and Bitcoin become a useful store of value from that point forward. Or, to put it another way, just because the Bitcoin that exists today is a bad store of value, doesn't mean that "Bitcoin is a bad store of value" is an immutable fact about Bitcoin. It could just be a fact about today.
- redthrowaway 12y agoWell, sure. PHP could also become a nice language to code in. Neither outcome seems likely, given what we've seen in the past.