Have any qualifying statements to make regarding this?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Not sure what you mean, I just definitely want both if one is gonna be gone someday

Why

Idk what one will be gone, and if I thought I knew, I'd be concerned about that backfiring on me

So you dont want both you want the one that wins and your hedging your bet

Since I remember you saying fucked up shit to me in the past, I've gotta point out that your wording makes it sound like we're not discussing a hypothetical you presented, and I assume that's not an accident

But also, what are you even saying? How do you suggest you'd hedge your bet without holding both in this case?

I'm saying hypothetically it would be more efficient if there was just one that could do it all and you wouldn't need to hedge

Maybe, but that could also help power consolidate into a small group of people over time and then backfire

If a consolidated group of power seeked rent based on position then a new coin with better decentralition would outcompete the rent seeking

Then that's not just one

Eventually we solve the problems and have the coin

Seems unlikely, like people would always keep things changing instead

Theres not really an endless improvement to money. There are a number of attributes and i think they can be perfected in crypto.

But you can still rebrand the perfect crypto approximately infinite times

Yes it's the consensus thats the unrepeatable part

I just don't think humans would ever form/keep a permanent consensus on one money to use