You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
I'd love to hear @CaitlinLong_ @TraceMayer @CathieDWood @AriannaSimpson @NickSzabo4 @eric_lombrozo @adam3us @DHannum8 too if possible
Layer 1 is a settlement layer, its trust minimization akin to gold but able to be settled online. Layer 2 is retail cash (among other applications). This falls out of the computer science and trust minimization being the essential top priority for a seamlessly global currency.
Appreciate the feedback. Would you agree that the terminology discrepancy between money/cash/currency is not what should be focused on in the first place? Seems that the basis of the argument back in the day when BCH split was that Bitcoin wasn't fulfilling the "cash" aspect.
Yes, those are very broad and overlapping terms.
This is what I have found to be the best distinction between those terms. Even academic sources and dictionaries contradict each other on this and confuse the issue. Start at 4:01 and watch for 37 seconds:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyV0OfU3-FU&t=242s …
interesting. so money is a store of value, medium of exchange & unit of account; where currency is forms of money in circulation: promissory notes which became fiat currency and no longer a store of value, since the removal of monetary backing. gold is money, fiat is currency.
Gold maximalism. Only dominant for a short period of time. For most of the history of the metallic metals (gold, silver, copper), from Mesopotamian tablets to still many parts of the world in the 19th century, they were all considered money.
Yes, from 1871 to 1914 to be exact. A short period of time, but an incredible period, too!
It was a period where the gold mostly sat in bank vaults and people used trust-based IOUs. Which trust was later abused to turn those IOUs into fiat. Meh.
Amazing that most people in the space haven't figured this out already, as many prominent figures have posited this for quite some time now. Bitcoin has a greater destiny than buying Starbucks. That narrative died in dec 2017.
Bitcoin is to protect your wealth, bitcoin (layer 2) is for the coffee.
Layer 1 - Savings Layer 2 - Checking If you believe in the potential of LN, which I do at this point in time, its a fair argument to make that when you take your BTC off L1-->L2 to spend you are essentially moving wealth from savings-->checking. Not 1:1 comparison, but helps IMO
When you truly have it rationalized, you will never consider the idea of "spending" Bitcoin. You're on the right track in many regards, IMHO.
Bitcoin is useless if you can't spend it. It is quite literally for storing and spending. Why do people store value? To spend it.
I think his point has some merit in the short term. If I am of the belief that $BTC will continue to accrue value at a rapid pace, as it has not yet become a unified money, I am disincentivized to spending it. I go into why I think we should spend it here:https://twitter.com/ArcaChemist/status/1156409635466649606 …
Given a choice, all societies will spend in a soft currency and save in a hard one. This is at the crux of what we are trying to do. The tipping point where all realize that an exit of inflationary & arbitrarily printed currencies is not only inevitable, but required for survival
That presumes it is easy and very low cost to convert between the two currencies, but it may often not be.
$dero is layer 1 privacy. It will replace eth one day.
I love Layer 2 Lightning Networks are awesome 
That’s btc, not Satoshi’s Bitcoin.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
