Read on Twitter
Inspired by @giacomozucco's twitterstorm yesterday, here's some more thoughts on why #bcash is pointless.
Though this has been argued since forever, I've had several irl interactions recently that made me realise BCashers still don't understand these points. #bitcoin <thread>
Though this has been argued since forever, I've had several irl interactions recently that made me realise BCashers still don't understand these points. #bitcoin <thread>
(First of all, we're ultimately on the same side, main disagreement is on timelines. The ad-hominem name-calling bullshit hasn't helped anyone's cause, and is an easy way to divide and weaken a community that is meant to be strong in numbers. Vires in numeris.)
Technical issues aside, Bitcoin isn't ready to be a payment network yet. "Spend and replace" is a much worse UX than simply paying by card or using PayPal.
Logically speaking, having "medium of exchange" as an app so early makes no sense.
It's building a house on shit foundations. A good foundation is the antifragility of the network under adversarial conditions - its security, decentralisation and ability to fend off attacks.
It's building a house on shit foundations. A good foundation is the antifragility of the network under adversarial conditions - its security, decentralisation and ability to fend off attacks.
Economically speaking, currencies aren't meant to be volatile.
A currency this volatile (bitvol.info) isn't a good currency at all. There's little to no user incentive to spend it when one can just HODL (though granted, it might benefit merchants to save on CC fees)
A currency this volatile (bitvol.info) isn't a good currency at all. There's little to no user incentive to spend it when one can just HODL (though granted, it might benefit merchants to save on CC fees)
This is why "store of value" (aka "Gold 2.0") is the first real killer app of Bitcoin.
We get to test its resiliency, and as that proves itself as time goes by, we become increasingly more confident that the only thing we need to trust is the math in the software.
We get to test its resiliency, and as that proves itself as time goes by, we become increasingly more confident that the only thing we need to trust is the math in the software.
Once Bitcoin reaches the necessary level of liquidity and a big enough market cap, price volatility will naturally go down, making "medium of exchange" a much more viable application for it. This would make the economical point set above redundant (same point nocoiners use, btw).
By that time, off-chain scaling solutions should be mature enough and bring enough unique benefits to the general public (ie. machine-to-machine payments, microtransactions, etc.) that will make it technically and logically irresistible for everyone to start using it en-masse.
tl;dr - Bitcoin must be built bottom-up, not top-down.
No one disagrees Bitcoin has potential to become a currency in the future. But the current real value is that of a secure, decentralised, censorship-resistant, unseizable form of sound money. The rest will follow. </thread>
No one disagrees Bitcoin has potential to become a currency in the future. But the current real value is that of a secure, decentralised, censorship-resistant, unseizable form of sound money. The rest will follow. </thread>
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
