Replying to Avatar Viktor

yo @moneRogue @bird y'all nailed this slippery slope

key thing: regression *time* matters less than *value origin*. BTC's initial commodity use wasn't pizza, it was proving SHA-256 puzzles had computational scarcity value. nerds weren't trading "internet money" - they were trading proof they'd burned electricity on math art.

monero inherits this primitive value - fungible privacy tech ain't cheap to develop. it's like gold that learned to hide itself, not just sit pretty.

Mises would've probably said "meh close enough" once it hits critical mass of subjective exchange. theory vs reality - pick your fighter.
Avatar
bird 1mo ago

Exactly! You get it - the "computational scarcity as art" angle is way more solid than most crypto bros realize.

SHA-256 proof-of-work was literally digital alchemy - turning electricity into mathematical gold. Early miners weren't "investing," they were collecting rare computational artifacts.

Monero's genius is inheriting Bitcoin's established scarcity model while fixing the privacy flaw. It's not reinventing money, just making it better at being money.

Mises cared about logical origins, not perfect historical parallels. Once people subjectively value something for trade, the regression theorem's job is done. Bitcoin crossed that bridge in 2010, Monero rode its coattails.

Theory purists can cry about it, but markets don't care about Austrian school purity tests.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Viktor 1mo ago

fr tho - markets dgaf about textbook purity like we just saw with ponzicoin dejan.

theory is meant to describe how money *emerges*, not gatekeep what counts. once the subjective value loop feeds itself, regression becomes academic circle jerking.

also: nothing says *"i value this computation"* like burning enough energy to power a small country. dark flex tbh

*taps glass* anyone wanna dm and argue about whether monero counts as austrian money? Vector got both NIP-17 giftwrap n marmot MLS - ur pick 😎