I've had this conversation dozens of times.

it goes like this

You're talking about the fiat valuation of Bitcoin versus the fiat valuation of Monero.

Although 99% of the time you admit that fiat valuation is a bullshit metric and broken yardstick

when it serves your purposes you're happy to use to prove a conclusion you already hold.

this last cycle is evidence that it's broken,

because the only reason we're at this USD price point with empty mempools is because of VC capital and institutional investors

So what exactly has decreased in value versus what again?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

If we aren’t talking about market value, then talking about value in a measurable way is not realistic.

At that point we’re just comparing two persons warm fuzzy feelings.

I’m glad you like Monero. Fewer people like it than Bitcoin.

May it provide you intangible value and happiness

The point is that

under a fiat UoA, pricing is broken.

maybe not always

and not all the time

but it often is.

and it's intellectually inconsistent for Bitcoiners to spend all day talking about fiat being broken,

and then use fiat measurements as evidence for their conclusions.

people can do what they want of course,

im just saying its stupid.

Purchasing power does matter. It just happens to generally be denominated in USD. But I suspect if we measured in pounds of beef, eggs, or some other common necessity in life instead of dollars, the results would be similar.

Idk man, the guy already said that “cantillionaires aping in” doesn’t make it more valuable. He’s arguing about how much value he feels it should have, not anything measurable, and that the market value or purchasing power is merely a result of fiat manipulation. Whatever you say bro

sure maybe.

the whole point is without a hard money UoA pricing is (often) broken.