Nostr Web Client

A currency being backed by something means you can redeem the currency for that thing.

When the dollar was backed by gold, you could go to the issuer of dollars and demand gold. The dollar had value because gold had value, not because there was stored energy or the accounting system or anything like that.

With Bitcoin you have no particular right to go to the miner and demand energy or "blocks". So it is unbacked just as fiat currency now is.

Moreover, the energy used to create Bitcoin does not confer value. This is a variation of the labor theory of value, which has rightly been discarded for subjective theory of value - see my longer post in this thread (replying to Sec Yellen) for a more complete explanation.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Secretary Janet Yellen 2y ago

Yes, you needed a centralized authority. Show me a better system than #Bitcoin while keeping it decentralized.

I take metal disks and guard them with my life & smokeless powder

There is no trade without trust, except perhaps physical barter (and even there is a degree of trust)

Secretary Janet Yellen 2y ago

Again, we've tried your trust thingy with gold for a few thousands of years. It didn't work.

Your metal disks need a trust and a centralized authority to verify the purity. #Bitcoin works better.

Exponentially better

I don’t need to demand “a block” from miners, as they were compensated for securing my transaction.

How’s that not value for value?

You’re right, it’s not the energy that gives Bitcoin value, but the miners who play by the rules of its protocols, alongside those who utilise the service they provide.

Who is anyone to say Bitcoin has no value to the people who are using it daily to survive in SE Asia, Africa and South America?

Why does it have to be backed by something redeemable when what I redeemed is the good or service I got for the Bitcoin I spent?

“SOMEBODY MUST GIVE IT VALUE SO I CAN GIVE IT VALUE”.

That’s total none sense.

Bitcoin separates state and money. A decentralised medium of exchange is what the world needs.

US Federal Reserve Notes "have value"

Euro notes "have value"

Who are you to tell a billion people in the Western world whose use these notes every day that their notes don't really have value?

Well, all you need to be is somebody who can think & realize the notes are an accounting unit divorced from reality. The same is true of Bitcoin.

How is the same true for Bitcoin when it is decentralised in nature compared to the currencies you are mentioning?

It's a decentralized accounting unit which does not track any real thing

It tracks monetary value energy in cyber space being moved from one owner to another.

Forgot to remove the word “energy” before I posted.

Vibe

Yeah, the Saylor Vibe.

OceanSlim 2y ago

Bitcoin is the thing that backs everything else.

There is no Bitcoin, there is only an accounting record of how many Bitcoins Mr. Satoshi owes you

No offense mate, but you sound like someone who is willfully blind to innovation, in this case monetary. Bitcoin is no currency - it's what currencies will be backed by in the future, because the trusted parties who used to abuse their position throughout history are made obsolete by it. Read that again. Bitcoin will obsolete monetary gold. It's a better form of money.

Why does Bitcoin have nonzero value?

It's secure and can be "sent" instantly etc etc

But those processes are only valuable if Bitcoin is valuable

So why does Bitcoin have nonzero value?

It's way more scarce than the currencies you are measuring it against. This feature is also very, very hard to change in the future. Should it ever change everyone would be able to see it happen right away. Predetermined inflation. Supply is openly verifiable. It's a bearer asset, not an IOU slip. Those few are why I value it, for more feedback you can turn to the market.

You can touch your gold all day long, but bitcoin is superior money.

Way, way more scarce - there isn't any!

Corporations and states are investing billions in hardware to attain that which isn't there. The market is wrong will probably be your next argument.

Cryptography and math make shiny rocks obsolete.

Not another, but a better form of money.

Is the market wrong to value gold?

Is the market wrong to value fiat notes?

The Bitcoin maxi case can't depend on the current valuation of Bitcoin because doing so validates fiat & gold as well (and of course the historical value of South Sea Company stock & Enron stock would be defended as well)

This is assuming gold and Fiat is the only way to value Bitcoin.

A more probably cause for this discussion is you don’t understand Bitcoin, and that’s okay.

Is your argument that bitcoin will die because people wont have anything to value it against once fiat dies?

My argument is we will revert to barter & only True Believers will accept Bitcoin, and they will quickly lose faith when they see how few other True Believers there are.

Also, you might lose electricity or Internet temporarily.

Go back in history and see how well humanity has dealt with setbacks of their living standard.

Maybe some will go back to barter, most will not, when they see how easy it is to use Bitcoin.

This may happen. It also may not, in which case it is prudent to look into bitcoin while it is being monetized amidst the global fiat printer race.

Yes, as a speculation during fiat collapse I think Bitcoin might temporarily spike in real value.

Similarly, fiat might have a temporary deflationary spike before hyperinflation. I have no desire to hold a bunch of Federal Reserve Notes to speculate on such a situation.

Do as you wish, a lot of people are one-way into bitcoin and cba to speculate on swings. However the monetary pendelum swings is anybody's guess.

"Spike in real value" is refreshing as you have been claiming it has none. Not sure it's a good description for any money as value is highly subjective.