Thought I'd give a bit of healthy balance to the fanboism here. Imagine how you'd feel if every 3rd post on Nostr was shilling a shitcoin. I believe in just 1 more shitcoin than you do.
We're going to pretend its unable to be edited arbitrarily by one of five dudes. Because you can always fork, right?
If you believe it should be finite, you'd think you'd go for a non-fiat good - one that never had an arbitrary amount decreed into existence, and one that physically could not, ever.
How's that inflation avoidance doing anyway? You sure if my widgets are finite they cannot lose value? Last I checked (today) BTC inflated 45% more than USD did in the past year. Talking hypothetical is great and all, but no central planner has ever invented a good that doesnt lose value relative to other goods, and it doesnt start here.
At least we know how he looks.
I have a feeling Satoshi looks like a huge black building covered in glass.
You can write a bot to follow them and repost ;)
You made 2 points, I addressed the first and will clarify here. Your 2nd point was a non-issue, we buy *despite* deflation of money relative to a good like a TV, and that's also what I said: Deflation discourages spending - not prevents it.
Wanting to reduce voluntary exchanges makes you flatly anti-human. Terms like "rampant overspending" put oneself in the place of God to tell other people how rich they shouldn't be. It' s completely interchangeable with "rampant overearning" since you prefer what you get to what you spend.
Did you even notice what I said? Every time someone spends, not only someone else earns, but THEY earn more than they spent - in their own estimation!
You want people to earn less. To spend less is to earn less, because every voluntary exchange, by definition, is at least expected to give all parties something they prefer to what they gave up.
It's never a positive, unless you're a primitivist who idealizes and romanticizes poverty.
"I actually find the incentive to reduce voluntary exchanges to be a positive."
Doh. What you're really saying is a lot clearer worded this way.
Spending is not just spending, it's also earning. Every time you spend, someone else earns. But also, every time you spend, you earn more than you spent, in your own estimation - or you wouldn't have spent!
Maximizing voluntary exchanges is an unbridled good.
You arbitrarily selected 1 sale of all the goods in the world, once, and 1 spend of all the Bitcoin, once. It doesn't seem arbitrary because 1 is such an upstanding character, but it is because so many goods and all money can be spent repeatedly. This is why there's no hidden hand matching up all the money to all the goods. Once.
"I disagree. Because, transactions have to be settled."
I was trying to be polite, but you can't actually settle buying everyone even once at 7 transactions per second lol. How many aeons do we have to wait? It would take half a minute just to settle for everything on my properties alone.
"You couldn't buy a BTC from me at current market price, and I couldn't sell you a BTC at current market price: That's what make a market".
Really, that's the opposite of what makes a market. You don't have a market until you have something I want more than something I have which you want, and vice versa. We're just passing each other like ships in the night. Bitcoin has other tricks up its sleeve to discourage exchange, like the expectation to be worth more tomorrow. As I just spelled out in my response to someone else here, the implication of the Austrian understanding that prosperity itself comes from voluntary exchanges, is that every exchange that never happened because you chose to hodl Bitcoin means Bitcoin made everyone poorer on net.
You value selling the Dogecoin, the Dogecoin as a means, not the Dogecoin as an end. Which is exactly the right way to think about any exchange currency.
People here talk about stacking and hodling Bitcoin as if digital fiat on a grand unified surveillance chain should be valued as a good in itself, not a mere facilitator of exchange to give away immediately, like your Dogecoin.
Oh, that's because they believe it is centrally planned to be deflationary, all of reality be damned? Their end, then, is accruing wealth, and the means is buying Bitcoin low and selling Bitcoin high. But if the price of Bitcoin is expected to rise, that actively discourages the use case as a medium of exchange. You're less likely to hire Johnny to mow your lawn, more likely to do it yourself - and thus make the whole economy poorer, one exchange that never happened at a time (the Austrian school teaches us prosperity itself excretes from the felt improvement in standard of living from both parties to a voluntary exchange). By discouraging voluntary exchanges, Bitcoin makes everyone poorer in real terms - regardless what happens to it's index price.
Any large fluctuation in any direction retards the function of an exchange currency and renders economic calculation in terms of anything else in advance impossible. And with a centrally planned, artificially fixed rate of supply, there's no market-determined rate of supply that can ramp up or down to counterbalance swings in demand, to stabilize the price, like there is with most goods. Bitcoin is thus engineered to swing wildly in response to any changes in apparent demand, enabling whales to game it by wash trading and generally just guaranteeing volatility into the future.
You really don't appreciate how bad Nostr is for DM's until you do this:
Paste someone you find interesting's pubkey into any client and open Messages. You will see who is sliding into their DMs, when and how often they chat, who sends the most messages, how far apart, etc.
And nobody knows you looked. This is death to many relationships and vital business intelligence. Just scrolling this thread, I can tell you who is working with whom and who is hitting on whom behind the scenes.
Why are you arbitrarily selecting the price of buying all goods only once?
Why are you arbitrarily selecting the value of spending all the money only once?
Couldn't there be too many goods to ever be bought with all the money in one go? Yes. Money circulates, the same $1 bill has bought maybe $600 worth of goods.
Goods also circulate, so I don't understand how you settled on 1 sale once for each thing.
There is no invisible hand pushing 'the value' of a money to match the price of buying precisely all of the goods in an economy precisely once.
You and I value everything very differently, and that valuation is not in terms of a nominal amount (25420 of another good) but an ordinal ranking (1st, 2nd, 3rd). This also applies to BTC. I don't value it at the index price. Never have.
If you valued things in terms of nominal amounts you would sit there clicking Buy until you are broke. Whenever you buy anything. And that's what a lot of people do with Bitcoin, because it gets them in the mindset of nominal objective value. The Bitcoin mindset says value is an objective, nominal thing that is wide open to manipulation through central planning (like the artificially fixed rate of supply and periodic halving). Not the subjective, ordinal ranking clearly articulated by the Austrian school.
Guess how much I value 1 BTC at? I wouldn't give up my salad. If you say that's a lie, I would resell it, all you're pointing out is that I value what I could sell it for -- not the BTC. That in itself is less than worthless, because it comes with and leaves a surveillance snail trail. That something is scarce doesn't "make it valuable" in an objective sense. But you cannot understand why until you understand there's no such thing as objective value.
I guess I'm lost in that I don't understand:
a) what force of nature that ensures there must be enough of one good, in this case Bitcoin, to buy everything
b) why you expect a hard limit out of a fiat good, of all goods, since the fact of being fiat is all that enables a good *not* to have any hard limit
Yes, Bitcoin is fiat. There was an arbitrary amount decreed into existence. 42M could have been arbitrarily decreed and written into code, and needn't have cost a keystroke more, proving it's fiat nature.
We're 1 code commit by 1 developer away from it being shifted, again proving it's fiat nature. I wouldn't bet the solar system on something that can happen in a few keystrokes not happening.
PS: (a) is the most interesting part of this, for me.
1. Encryption is obfuscation, not privacy. Private in data terminology means inaccessible; out of reach; not public.
2. Your encrypted content can be decrypted by ANY nsec leak which is party to the conversion. So it's not even in your hands. How many forms are your chat buddies pasting their nsec into?
3. The only encrypted part is the message content. Even with perfect security for all involved, anyone can see who you're messaging, how often, when - all the metadata is public af.
I hope it doesn't get any eyeballs before being corrected. "Nostr aims to decentralize public communications." Fixed. This was a false claim and I bet the OG devs like #[5] would agree.
The only part I mind about Nostr is that every 3rd post is a Bitcoin ad.
"Nostr aims to decentralize private communications" ... wtf lol.
Private and Nostr do not belong in the same sentence.
21M / everything in the solar system 'becomes real' lol.
What's the thought process here?
Money, the Austrian school teaches us, 'is a good like any other'. Why must any specie of any good be valued the same as everything else? What rule of nature dictates this?
Bitcoin can never somehow be the only thing traded. Traded for what? See. Everything beyond that question mark is also being traded, obviously, and can be traded for other things beyond that question mark without using your grand unified surveillance chain. Ta-da.
Value, the Austrian school teaches us, is subjective. You are heavily mistaken to think value can be imbued into a thing objectively with math. Have you even noticed guaranteed deflation through a centrally planned rate of supply didn't work, at all?
Oh: 21M doesnt appear in the whitepaper, its not holy script. It can be changed by 1 of 5 guys and you can fork off all you want. - how you feel about it is the strength others felt about their reasons to fork off. Nobody ever considers a fork of Bitcoin Core or WordPress Core (both centralized open source projects, unlike Nostr) to be the real Bitcoin or WordPress, and no one ever will.
WordPress Core at least has decentralized databases - Bitcoin hasn't, its all the same database distributed over a CDN; distributed, not decentralized.
Without any one of the nsec's of anyone in the encrypted chat.
So it doesn't matter how careful you are with yours.
Nostr is unsuitable for DM or secure chat anyway,, only public speech.
Bitcoin is engineered to be volatile. A market determined rate of supply would increase or decrease with demand, stabilizing the price. But Bitcoin opted for a centrally planned rate of supply, artificially fixed in advance.
Which means there's no stabilizing mechanism. That's why it can never be seriously used for budgeting, stocking, nor performing accurate economic calculation in advance.
I wouldn't bet on the price not swinging both ways forever, as it was designed to (and the reason people see Bitcoin on the evening news).