Nick Szabo  🔑

Agree, and hard to tease out the circularity caused by self-selection bias: some developers are more interested in Bitcoin’s set of tradeoffs than others, and thus more willing to work within them rather than materially change them.

Stock/flow currently close to silver. In May it doubles & is close to gold. Work is required to produce it. Inflation schedule changes for nothing, no matter the demand, so BTC is one of the most scarce things to ever exist. It's a bearer asset & easy to verify.

These are all flowery words unless someone is willing to stand up and say bitcoin's purchasing power will be superiorly stable.

When holder adoption plateaus at the top of the S-Curve and BTC obtains sufficient marketcap it makes sense that it’s purchasing power will stabilize in a similar sense that gold is ‘stable’ imo Then, if BTC becomes a unit of account then it would be far more stable than fiat

The dollar is by no means stable, but dollar moves make everything else look unstable bc everything is denominated in dollars When the Fed announces anything & there is suddenly precious metal, stock market, BTC & oil price volatility all at once, that's just dollar volatility

There is absolutely a means by which the dollar is stable as it is targeted versus the cpi etc. And yes of course dollar movement shows up in other things across the board.

Lower order goods do not reflect dollar volatility bc every level of production serves as a buffer. You might as well say "look wages didn't change today so the dollar is stable."

Do you mean to argue that bitcoin, which has a purchasing power that relies solely on demand...is going to be more stable than a centrally banked money that controls/influences its supply based on targeting measured purchasing power?