Bitcoin (BTC) as Money

Yes, I changed my mind about the main topic (which is what I assume you’re asking?). See how the lowest level leaf on my discussion tree is unanswered.

Yeah, that’s what I was asking.

You might have added the node but not been fully convinced, or were waiting and thinking about it.

Do you want to talk about any related things? Like whether BTC will definitely go to 0 at some point?

I am interested in what could have been done differently / better, too.

Sure, I definitely have some other unresolved questions about crypto stuff that I’d like to know, e.g.

  • are NFTs as dumb as I think they are?

  • are there any good uses for blockchain technology that aren’t related to subverting regulators/authorities?

  • are there any protocols which are robust against government interference (or even just robust against interference from relatively free governments that pay lip service to freedom of speech)?

  • how do I think properly about when the crypto bubble will pop?

If you’re looking for more of a debate thing, something that comes to mind is that you indicated elsewhere in this thread (or in the other) that you think ETH is a commodity, and you didn’t seem to accept my argument that burning ETH is really just an obfuscated way of paying people for services (as opposed to consuming a commodity).

I don’t think this is a great question as it is currently phrased. We can’t answer it definitively because it depends too acutely on peoples’ choices. Like, it’s definitely physically possible for BTC to stay above 0: people could choose (knowingly or unknowingly) to keep its value inflated.

That criticism also kind of applies to the original proposition “In the long run, the value of BTC will NOT go to ~0,” but it’s more vague. What we really did earlier was we answered a more answerable question “Are there any natural barriers to stop BTC from going to zero?” or something like that.

I liked the debate tree thing. I don’t think the conversation would have reached a conclusion without it

Mostly, yes.

There are sensible ideas for NFTs.

Here’s an example: a TCG like MTG.[1] The secondary market for MTG cards relies on their physically limited supply (and things like when they were printed, how many runs/sets, materials used, wizards of the coast’s (WOC’s) policies, etc). Digital MTG cards are records on WOC servers, similar to $ in normal banks but with lesser security standards. A p2p TCG game + secondary market has some advantages over typical client-server games (like MTG arena / hearthstone). You can have a p2p TCG + market with a central issuer (so WOC could run an MTG blockchain game using NFT tech).

Here are some.

I am going to presume a western idea of “regulators/authorities”. e.g., free speech tech subverts the CCP – I guess that you’re not interested in excluding that kind of subversion (tho mb you are interested to know when it could subvert bad authorities)

  • p2p end-to-end verifiable voting systems w/ secret ballot (so that anyone can download and verify the votes). possible criticisms: no point if you can’t verify the electoral roll, you can’t do electronic secret ballot b/c of X. (I have a response to the latter that I can give in private.)

  • twitter / YT type app that is not able to be censored / manipulated like these platforms are being

  • asset exchanges (like forex, stock markets) that do not rely on a central intermediary (mostly not an issue, but sometimes is. e.g., a company in an unstable country/region might have use for this; not a subversion of govt, but protection against govt failure)

  • tokens (money, stock, NFTs, whatever) that need a high degree of connectivity (but low liquidity is okay); normally financial systems are only practical using a pipeline with reliable services that have the right capacity/pricing for the use case. those are not available everywhere, and sometimes you can’t connect two endpoints if you need more than 1 service. An international transaction (IME) uses ~3 services.

    • theoretically (no pratical examples yet), blockchain systems should be able to support transactions between any two locations without adding extra services and things in between – this is not yet a reality, but it’s able to be implemented. So you could start with a low-liquidity unoptimized ~MVP and then build up later.

Not if you include turning off the internet as government interference.

Yes WRT relatively free govts. This isn’t a blockchain example, but good protocols are definitely possible – Signal was subpoenaed for user records and complied as they could:

I don’t think about it: I’m not exposed. If/when I am again: I don’t know.

  1. These are NFTs in the sense that there are X non-fungible cards in a set. But each of those cards might be fungible w/ cards of the same name. The limit of non-fungible are things like ultra-rare cards (similar to ultra-rare CS:GO skins or w/e). I have other examples, but this is the easiest to see, I think. ↩︎

I’m interested in discussing this. Do you want to start? (Mb a new thread is appropriate.) I can respond or start tomorrow. (too tired tonight)

will respond to this more later


Yeah, might be a good idea since it’s not about “BTC as money” anymore. I’ll leave making the thread to you since I think it’s on you to explain why what I said about ETH is wrong.

You shouldn’t have private conversations with people you don’t know and tell them things you aren’t willing to say publicly.

Good point.