Yes, but if you're worried about the tiny inflation that monero has (less than that of gold) it is irrelevant if you only use Monero to transact and Bitcoin to save longterm.
Best of both worlds.
Discussion
Monero’s narrative was more compelling pre-L2 developments on BTC. Seems like the narrative is diminishing with every passing day, esp if the BTC user is KYC-free. The constant, developer-driven hard forks are also disconcerting.
L2s always come with trade-offs like the aforementioned Cashu - loss of custody or centralization tendencies, etc.
I don't think it is diminishing like you say. If there is a use case for private and self-custodial digital cash, Monero is still one of the few to meet that criteria. Non-KYC does diminish the risk, but other parties you transact with still have full view into your stack (if you don't conjoin).
If Bitcoin figures out a way to have on-par or better privacy, without loss of custody, and cheap txs, I will use it.
The hard forks are not constant and are driven by the community, in the open.
https://sethforprivacy.com/posts/dispelling-monero-fud/#moneros-hard-forks-make-it-centralized
Monero only hard forks as needed, which is just once every few years at this point.
Now we’re venturing into semantics. So many holes in the Monero narrative. Blockchain bloat, lack of decentralization, inflation…it’s simply not designed to withstand the test of time. It’s an improvement on fiat, but not on Bitcoin whatsoever. Money is indeed a zero-sum game.
Read the post I linked and offer some well-reasoned retort, happy to hear it then.
Right now it just sounds like you're repeating the common FUD that is almost entirely baseless.
Sure Seth. The Monero blockchain is bloated and there’s no way that the amount of storage needed to run a full node is economically feasible for 95+% of the world, even taking into account the deflationary nature of technology. Eventually the story of Monero will be that it’s decent tech, but not good enough, and ultimately a detraction from true progress being made on the Bitcoin protocol.
When has there ever been one money in all human history? The freer the markets the more kinds of money you would expect (although they could gravitate to one but never completely).
Different valid design choices based on goals and you uncharitably call them narratives. All while citing the "one money" bitcoin maxi narrative.
If you think of Monero as trying to be private p2p digital cash it makes perfect sense. If you think of it from a one money, place to store value, absolute scarcity that is competing with bitcoin perspective, than ya it doesn't surprise me why you came to that conclusion.
There’s a lack of charity in general because the thinking is that the Monero project is a detraction from the advocacy and development that needs to be taking place on the Bitcoin protocol, the protocol that’s truly fixing money.
It's undeserved lack of charity. Bitcoiners take anything not bitcoin as an attack on them even when goals are different.
If Bitcoin focused on privacy and fungibility there would be no need for Monero and it wouldn't exist. So this is the outcome. Then maxis get upset when it is built into another crypto that focuses on these goals specifically. Bitcoin purported solutions are always half-solutions. If bitcoin tries doing everything well, it will do nothing well.
Like I said, if bitcoin figures out how to do it better, I will use it.