"Please implement your better idea so that we can all use that"
See? Blockheads don't know how to think in terms of the multi-polar decentralized plurality of solutions that real bottom-up systems exhibit.
Bitcoin (well, the central planners they hid from you to let you imagine there are none and talk about it like an actor) certainly did not "take into account all of the reasons why these monies didn't work". Else it would have a market-determined rate of supply. The market-determined rate of supply is well understood by actual Austrian economists to be THE price stabilizing mechanism.
Bitcoin with it's centrally planned, artificially fixed cap and rate of supply, will never have a price stabilizing mechanism to counter-balance wild swings due to shifts in demand (actual or faked). This lets whales 'prime' the price before making a major buy or sell move.
Bitcoin will never not be volatile. When the rate of supply hits the artificial fiat (by decree) cap of 21M (which appears nowhere in the whitepaper and can be changed by 1 of 5 devs with write access to the centrally hosted git repository. Yes, "you can always fork" but nobody has ever considered a fork of Bitcoin the 'real deal', nor will they. The fact is the fiat cap is arbitrary and can conceivably be changed. It's frustrating talking to Bitcoiners who keep claiming it has properties it doesn't.
But let's say the 21M really doesn't change. What then? Will Bitcoin magically become less volatile? No! The centrally planned rate of supply simply becomes artificially fixed to zero. Volatility is built in, and if you think about it, this baked-in volatility from the planner(s) rejecting a market-determined rate of supply is the only reason anyone heard of Bitcoin on the evening news.
Here is a free audiobook on the history of "money" before brand-name currencies like USD and BTC. You know, akshully decentralized solutions: http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/64160
A lack of research on decentralized systems of credit and debt that leads to crap like "no moneis have worked, ever" -- a ludicrous claim that should knock anyone out their chair -- is a choice.
If the supply *can be* changed, doesn't it mean that the market is always setting the supply, whether or not it *is* ever changed?
Of course I won't use your shitcoin if you or "1 of the 5 devs" changes the cap, but that, too, is a market choice.
You want a decentralized bottom-up plurality of solutions? I believe there have already been something like 20,000 alternatives with different issuance policies. So far, the market has chosen Bitcoin as the one to beat.
I wonder why?
#[2]
Thread collapsed
