Topic: Be your own bank: Why Bitcoin is the most valuable cryptocurrency (Read 835 times)

I'm curious as to how you think alts are "centralized" by default?  Especially compared to Bitcoin, where miners have obviously become more centralized than ever.  We are currently seeing miners right now have a war of blocksize ideology as I type.

I do agree though that alts do bring more to the table and allows people more freedom to try stuff theirselves, rather than just wait for the all might bitcoin core team to fork or do something that helps fix any problem whatsoever.

I do not understand how stable Bitcoin you are while its value goes up and down in a short time

People suggesting be your own bank with bitcoin forget that a bank is more than just a place to deposit money, its a place to get loans and access other forms of financial activity that bitcoin cannot or at least does not currently do.

~
But the transaction fees are killing me!
~

Let's look at Bitcoin for what it is: a fundamental human efficiency improvement.

Here's why it's valuable (value != price):
- The software and rules can't be changed easily or quickly. It takes years and a lot of global perspectives. Maybe they can't be changed at all.
- Therefore, it works exactly as expected: 24/7/365
- It's accessible anywhere in the world: 24/7/365
- It's accessible by everyone in the world who has a computer and internet connection

Because of these reasons we can say that XBT is stable and predictable. We already see how on many exchanges, XBT is being used as a base "currency" that all other cryptocurrencies are denominated in.

And because it's stable and predictable, it acts as an *international settlement system*, and therefore can also act as a global reserve currency. Currently, the incumbent settlement system (National central banks acting as clearing systems between commercial banks) is the only way the global economy can function. For some perspective, consider that financial activity consumes about 1/3 of the world's economic productivity (~USD30 trillion).

What about technologies that are Turing complete, more technically advanced, etc.?
- When we consider Bitcoin's primary function to be a global reserve currency and settlement system, these features are at best irrelevant.

But the transaction fees are killing me!
- Many cryptocurrency users recognize the financial and human costs of ledger transparency and mutability in the existing financial system, but didn't realize that the cost of immutability in a cryptocurrency could be the same or higher. Consider that correspondent banking is complex and costly, but those costs are absorbed by everyone who participates in the financial system (mostly taxpayers). At the moment Bitcoin users subsidize the current financial system through their taxes while also incurring the costs of their Bitcoin transactions, so the pain is naturally doubled. Users in different countries will also experience different transaction cost pain points, and some people will leave in search of something else to buy their coffee with. Sorry, there's no such thing as a free lunch, and billionaires that have been paying thousands to keep their transactions private in the existing banking system have no problem outbidding you on your next transfer, and in fact will likely have more trust in Bitcoin as the cost of using it increases. User behavior will update accordingly, and people will really "become their own bank".

Ethereum/Ripple/Dogecoin is overtaking Bitcoin's marketshare!
- XRP, ETH, etc. are tantalizing to banks, governments, and speculators. But they will only ever "experiment" with these things in order to generate PR and appear clever to their stakeholders. They know that these systems are not stable enough for production, and that's why there are no examples of anyone going "live" with the thing they built on their forked Ethereum blockchain. Cryptocurrency "Marketshare" is a buzzword concept created by speculators and marketers, who have no idea what the things they are buying right now are worth.

I'm curious as to how you think alts are "centralized" by default?  Especially compared to Bitcoin, where miners have obviously become more centralized than ever.  We are currently seeing miners right now have a war of blocksize ideology as I type.

I do agree though that alts do bring more to the table and allows people more freedom to try stuff theirselves, rather than just wait for the all might bitcoin core team to fork or do something that helps fix any problem whatsoever.

Bitcoin is neither stable, nor predictable, if it's less volatile than altcoins, it doesn't mean that it's price isn't the problem for people who want to use it as a currency. Of course Bitcoin is very likely to grow in long term, but short term value is very important for a currency, you don't want to receive something that is likely to lose 5-10% of its value at any moment.


Immutability is worth the price only when you really need it, otherwise you are just burning your money (and a lot of money) when you "buy your coffee" with Bitcoin. Right now transaction fees are so high that Bitcoin can't be considered a currency, but instead it should be called an asset, "digital gold", "immutable storage of value", etc.

It is really a waste of money now to use bitcoin to purchase everyday goods (if you haven't got the equivalent income in bitcoin monthly). I had used my bitcoin debit card frequently some years ago to buy a coke for 1 EUR, and I have paid with bitcoin. That time the price of bitcoin was about $300. Last week when the price of bitcoin nearly reached $3000, I had thought it over again, the coke was 10 EUR... I won't buy now anything for bitcoin, only in case of a real need...

I'm just going to touch on the points I bolded if you have no issues with that.

I don't believe that Bitcoin in its current state is anything close to predictable or stable when it comes to measuring up as a currency, but it is definitely secure when it comes to international trade. I don't know if it is really able to be anything close to a global reserve currency yet, however in the future it might be something to take note on. It would be interesting to see the $30T evaporate from economic activity due to Bitcoin becoming the most prominent medium, however.

I think that you bring up an interesting point about alts but you do miss the point that even though they are more centralized, they do pose an interesting medium (especially Ethereum) for performing different business-related transactions. They're not something to scoff at but they're not irrelevant either. They are more tantalizing to investors, but that can mean a lot.

Let's look at Bitcoin for what it is: a fundamental human efficiency improvement.

Here's why it's valuable (value != price):
- The software and rules can't be changed easily or quickly. It takes years and a lot of global perspectives. Maybe they can't be changed at all.
- Therefore, it works exactly as expected: 24/7/365
- It's accessible anywhere in the world: 24/7/365
- It's accessible by everyone in the world who has a computer and internet connection

Because of these reasons we can say that XBT is stable and predictable. We already see how on many exchanges, XBT is being used as a base "currency" that all other cryptocurrencies are denominated in.

And because it's stable and predictable, it acts as an *international settlement system*, and therefore can also act as a global reserve currency. Currently, the incumbent settlement system (National central banks acting as clearing systems between commercial banks) is the only way the global economy can function. For some perspective, consider that financial activity consumes about 1/3 of the world's economic productivity (~USD30 trillion).

What about technologies that are Turing complete, more technically advanced, etc.?
- When we consider Bitcoin's primary function to be a global reserve currency and settlement system, these features are at best irrelevant.

But the transaction fees are killing me!
- Many cryptocurrency users recognize the financial and human costs of ledger transparency and mutability in the existing financial system, but didn't realize that the cost of immutability in a cryptocurrency could be the same or higher. Consider that correspondent banking is complex and costly, but those costs are absorbed by everyone who participates in the financial system (mostly taxpayers). At the moment Bitcoin users subsidize the current financial system through their taxes while also incurring the costs of their Bitcoin transactions, so the pain is naturally doubled. Users in different countries will also experience different transaction cost pain points, and some people will leave in search of something else to buy their coffee with. Sorry, there's no such thing as a free lunch, and billionaires that have been paying thousands to keep their transactions private in the existing banking system have no problem outbidding you on your next transfer, and in fact will likely have more trust in Bitcoin as the cost of using it increases. User behavior will update accordingly, and people will really "become their own bank".

Ethereum/Ripple/Dogecoin is overtaking Bitcoin's marketshare!
- XRP, ETH, etc. are tantalizing to banks, governments, and speculators. But they will only ever "experiment" with these things in order to generate PR and appear clever to their stakeholders. They know that these systems are not stable enough for production, and that's why there are no examples of anyone going "live" with the thing they built on their forked Ethereum blockchain. Cryptocurrency "Marketshare" is a buzzword concept created by speculators and marketers, who have no idea what the things they are buying right now are worth.

Let's look at Bitcoin for what it is: a fundamental human efficiency improvement.

For some perspective, consider that financial activity consumes about 1/3 of the world's economic productivity (~USD30 trillion).

But the transaction fees are killing me!
- Many cryptocurrency users recognize the financial and human costs of ledger transparency and mutability in the existing financial system, but didn't realize that the cost of immutability in a cryptocurrency could be the same or higher.

Ethereum/Ripple/Dogecoin is overtaking Bitcoin's marketshare!
- XRP, ETH, etc. are tantalizing to banks, governments, and speculators. But they will only ever "experiment" with these things in order to generate PR and appear clever to their stakeholders. They know that these systems are not stable enough for production, and that's why there are no examples of anyone going "live" with the thing they built on their forked Ethereum blockchain. Cryptocurrency "Marketshare" is a buzzword concept created by speculators and marketers, who have no idea what the things they are buying right now are worth.

Bitcoin is neither stable, nor predictable, if it's less volatile than altcoins, it doesn't mean that it's price isn't the problem for people who want to use it as a currency. Of course Bitcoin is very likely to grow in long term, but short term value is very important for a currency, you don't want to receive something that is likely to lose 5-10% of its value at any moment.


Immutability is worth the price only when you really need it, otherwise you are just burning your money (and a lot of money) when you "buy your coffee" with Bitcoin. Right now transaction fees are so high that Bitcoin can't be considered a currency, but instead it should be called an asset, "digital gold", "immutable storage of value", etc.

Bitcoin is neither stable, nor predictable, if it's less volatile than altcoins, it doesn't mean that it's price isn't the problem for people who want to use it as a currency. Of course Bitcoin is very likely to grow in long term, but short term value is very important for a currency, you don't want to receive something that is likely to lose 5-10% of its value at any moment.


Immutability is worth the price only when you really need it, otherwise you are just burning your money (and a lot of money) when you "buy your coffee" with Bitcoin. Right now transaction fees are so high that Bitcoin can't be considered a currency, but instead it should be called an asset, "digital gold", "immutable storage of value", etc.

And because it's stable and predictable, it acts as an *international settlement system*,

But the transaction fees are killing me!
- Many cryptocurrency users recognize the financial and human costs of ledger transparency and mutability in the existing financial system, but didn't realize that the cost of immutability in a cryptocurrency could be the same or higher. Consider that correspondent banking is complex and costly, but those costs are absorbed by everyone who participates in the financial system (mostly taxpayers). At the moment Bitcoin users subsidize the current financial system through their taxes while also incurring the costs of their Bitcoin transactions, so the pain is naturally doubled. Users in different countries will also experience different transaction cost pain points, and some people will leave in search of something else to buy their coffee with. Sorry, there's no such thing as a free lunch, and billionaires that have been paying thousands to keep their transactions private in the existing banking system have no problem outbidding you on your next transfer, and in fact will likely have more trust in Bitcoin as the cost of using it increases. User behavior will update accordingly, and people will really "become their own bank".