Avatar
Argonaut
7525c1118c4a6cf32a8e7a46d6d1d82c61dbe71d2b246b33685f93b517488ad5

Is there an update on the two HODL models which demonstrated a decreasing available supply?

Saife was imagining a world where dollars no longer exist, and Saylor wasn't. It seemed to me 45 minutes of it was just not realizing this point.

IMO, there is no yield in a hyperbitcoinized world because there's nowhere for it to come from.

There is yield in a bitcoinized (SoV) world because govt currency will still be there to rise like an exponential tide to fool people who cannot see it.

Which of those things happen dictates who is right, but Saylor in particular was not at his best.

My two cents anyway.

Hey Max I wrote a little fairy tale about money inspired by what I've learned from Austrians and Libertarians. If you get a chance I'd love to know what you think:

Really enjoyed your podcast with Preston as well as your panel at cheat code.

https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqcasylmf4a20whutxt4gs9qzyq82d6pd7mnxfwj7pkmxnskqgvtjqqv9g6rjv4jj6nrfw36xcefd2p5kwued0fhxzdfhxcnhlpzy

Replying to Avatar Mandrik

I don't talk much about shitcoins, because I spend as little time possible thinking about them. I felt these thoughts bubbling up to the surface so thought I'd share them on Nostr.

I was seeking alternative currencies when I started using Bitcoin. During the initial wave of shitcoinery, I still had some level of interest from the "competing currency" standpoint, not at all related to pump and dump profiting. In fact, I was too naive to realize this is what they would become. Yes, I'm this retarded. 😂

Currently, I think of most shitcoins as a form of gambling. Gambling is idiotic and a waste of money, but that's my opinion. Some people want to do degen shit, and I'm not going to forcefully stop them.

I typically mute/block shitcoin stuff because I don't care about them. I don't waste my time looking at them, when Bitcoin does exactly what I need it to do. When people ask me my opinion on shitcoins I tell them to learn about Bitcoin and DCA sats instead.

Bitcoin is for anyone, but not everyone. I'd rather live in a world where not everyone wants to use Bitcoin. Maybe some want to voluntarily use bcash (lol) or monero. Live and let live. Voluntary money instead of forced govt fiat sounds ok to me.

To be clear:

I own no shitcoins other than two physical Lealana litecoin silver rounds that for some reason I've had since like 2013 or 2014. 😂 Not gonna lie, they look incredible.

In late 2017 I told Blockchain(dot)com I was quitting because they were adding shitcoins after supporting the failed Segwit2x chain. I left 7 figures worth of equity on the table when I quit, as well as a salary that was 4x more than I made at any point in my life. I could have stuck around another 6 months for those shares to vest, but chose to leave because yes, I'm this retarded. 😂

Does this make me a "shitcoin sympathizer?" Am I not "maxi enough" because of these beliefs?

Final thoughts: are all shitcoins scams? I don't think so, but many definitely are. Which ones are scams and which ones aren't? You can DYOR & hope you're right OR you can stop playing stupid games & just stack sats instead.

I'm glad I made the right decision.

Respect for walking away from money on moral grounds. I think this is rare.

Replying to Avatar DireMunchkin

One thing I worry about is if Bitcoin completely takes over as a store of value it would work rather too well to transfer wealth across generations, to the point where it starts to lead to very long lived dynasties.

Let's assume hyperbitcoinization already happened - I can just hodl, and get a safe, boring 3% real return by my Bitcoin appreciating. As long as you can live on less than 3% of your net worth a year, you are now financially independent. Not only that, but so are your children, and their grandchildren.

In the current systems fortunes have to be invested to keep their purchasing power, so you face *some* risk of loss. But if you hodl, as long as you use a good vault for the storage, there's very little reason any value will be lost to the family stack almost at all.

Not only that, but a relatively small amount of people mostly in the western world have cornered 70% of the supply of Bitcoin. What about if we're correct and this hodler controlled supply is the future capital stock of humanity? Now you have less than 1m people globally who control 70% of the liquid wealth of the world, that's horribly in-egalitarian.

Now maybe we as early adopters of Bitcoin deserve to get filthy rich for launching a new monetary system. But what about your heirs 3 generations down, should they control 70% of all liquid capital in the world?

Fast forward a few generations and you could have a new neoreactionary "noded nobility" class, hoarding most of the wealth, unironically telling the rest of society to have fun staying poor.

I think this is a good point, but the 3% you're describing is spent into the economy, not "generated" as a return. This group might have 70% of the Bitcoin and it might track world productivity to the tune of 2-3% per year so they don't need to work, but they will still have much less Bitcoin over time, they just won't be losing purchasing power.

I agree that the idea of unbreakable dynasties is a worry, but since it's absolutely scarce any spending is gone and irreplacable, even if the remaining sum is equivalent in purchasing power. So I wonder if this isn't actually an issue?

With 3% annual productivity gains, BTC doubles in purchasing power every 23 years. The reverse-halving for your every descendant to draw from the well and leave enough for the next.