5/ I don’t see how building even several successful dApps (let’s entertain this idea) on top of a money-candidate makes it all that much better as a money-candidate.
-
Show this thread
-
6/ Problem with many of these SV VCs and crypto “thought-leaders” is they have zero understanding of Monetary Economics especially in the context of borderless free markets, free of state monopolies, legal tenders, state decrees, coercion. This is what fiat has done to society.
2 replies 24 retweets 121 likesShow this thread -
7/ Instead, they think of these as mostly purely software platforms and try to apply previous-era Web 2.0 SV paradigms and their San Fran clichés. Instead, I believe that these are moneys wrapped in software. After all, they are *cryptocurrencies*. Money first and software second
1 reply 9 retweets 70 likesShow this thread -
8/ I don’t think big asset managers, university endowments, sovereign wealth funds, commercial banks, central banks or the rich HNWIs give a shit about decentralized roulette, nomadic DAOs or some blockchain tamagotchi.
5 replies 11 retweets 79 likesShow this thread -
9/ For any fixed-supply (or even relatively scarce
supply) digital coin to become “Money” or “Currency”, it needs to be 1) liquid, 2) stable, 3) disincentives to spend (when the mcap is small) lessened.3 replies 5 retweets 36 likesShow this thread -
-
Replying to @johnnymac1982
People usually desire their day-to-day currency to be relatively stable in its purchasing power.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MustStopMurad
I would prefer volatility to constant debasement...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @johnnymac1982
In the long-term / as a Store of Value — yes. In the short-term / as a Medium of Exchange — no.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.