When we talk about stability, I wouldn't compare Bitcoin in some way to gold and silver in terms of stability.
Gold and silver prices are more stable than Bitcoin, but Bitcoin has greater strength when it comes to resistance and bouncing back.
When the Bitcoin price wants to drop, it can drop beyond prediction, and when the price wants to pump, it can also do the same.
Of course, such a chip-coin would need to have a reader the size of a cell phone, that one could use to see if the chip-coin had been compromised... by comparing the chip-coin to the blockchain at the point of trade.
if the idea of the proposed chip coin is to be considered. How will the price of each chip be calculated? Will it be equal to 1 BTC based on the market price, or will it be chipped and produced with specific amounts of SATs holding on each of them just as normal currency value defers?
How many of these Chip coins are going to be produced since one can become useless after a first-hand trade and the buyer claims the proclaimed amount into his wallet, leaving the wallet empty?
just asking to be sure.
I didn't mean a strict comparison with gold and silver regarding volatility.
Chip-coins could be set with any value locked in. Anybody could get a blank chip-coin and add original value to it, but once it was there, it would be like a locked wallet that you traded. It's value could be checked by plugging it into a reader to compare it with the blockchain.
Nobody could enter bitcoins into the chip-coin in its blank state, except that he owned them in the blockchain already. But once he 'sent' them to the chip-coin, a hash would be made in the chip-coin and blockchain that didn't have any address to take them out again. Of course, since this is only an idea so far, it might be better to have a method built right into the chip-coin so that a reader could remove the bitcoins therein. We need real Devs to think about all this.
Would it be advisable to give the chip-coins an internal destruct mechanism to protect against people who wanted to physically alter them? This, and losing chip-coins, would be like burning them... like the Genesis blocks, until Satoshi moves them.
If enough bitcoins were lost or burned, the rest would naturally increase in value, so that the population of the world might have a substantial amount of them by using satoshi's rather than bitcoins. Wallets could be made that could split satoshi's into any number of smaller bits. Of course, the blockchain might need to be adjusted for this.
The most important understanding in this whole thing might be, we would be trading wallets rather than bitcoins directly. We could do this right now if we started a whole new kind of blockchain along with the original... an encrypted wallet transfer blockchain, that could both, check the value of the wallet, and be totally encrypted as the current blockchain... perhaps with a hash as the new wallet password every time it changed hands, so the old owner could no longer use it once he gave it up.
Just some thoughts.
EDIT: Trading wallets rather than trading bitcoins might bring the whole thing out of the domain of government regulations. At least, they would have to start a whole new train of thought to make regulations that would fit wallets.
