Nostr

Bitcoin is no exception to Mises regression theory, that argues good money requires a base utility purpose, it requires a commodity use.

But Bitcoin IS a commodity.

Bitcoins are the only material that the Bitcoin network accepts to publish data on the timechain. It is first a substance that is used to log entries on that database, and secondarily, but more commonly used as money.

Mises dudes can't see that.

mrclownworld 1y ago

Yes.

Record-keeping is an important human endeavor. The more reliable and complete a set of records are, the more valuable they are.

Bitcoin is a system in which something valuable (energy) is exchanged for something else valuable (nearly immutable record keeping). The medium of this exchange is a token called “bitcoins” which happens to also be the scarcest, most secure, and most portable form of money ever discovered.

Because of these desirable aspects, this token (which can natively be used to purchase immutable record keeping) also becomes an emergent form of general money.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

a source familiar with the matter 1y ago

If it's about record-keeping, why do I need 1BTC? Doesn't 0.1BTC keep the record just as perfectly?

mrclownworld 1y ago

You need to pay a fee to write new records, so you need to spend whatever the current fee rate per byte of data is. It’s an open global market, but the space in the next block is finite.

Once written, the record does ride free and the security/immutability comes from new records continuing to be written.

You don't need 1 BTC....have you ever used Bitcoin? You only need to pay a fee rate that will get you accepted in a block. The best way to put it, is that its an auction for block space.

I do agree that this (seeing Bitcoin as a commodity) is probably the wrong way to look at it though. I much prefer the social network principle as explained by libbitcoins wiki page (libbitcoin and Bitcoin core operate in consensus for the same network which we call Bitcoin.

I think the most important thing that the Mises guys are often wrong about, is forgetting a core piece of their own ideas, which is that economics is the study of human action and if an economy acts against what an economist predicts, then it is the economist who is wrong and must therefore update their hypothesis about human action.