![Mr. Bitcoin [BTC is forever]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/938595610617188352/gCS65PGQ_normal.jpg)
I think there's a big difference between a digital asset (bitcoin) and the digital representation of physical asset (US federal reserve notes, "dollars"). The first derives its "utility" and scarcity solely from the digital world, the second does not. Does this make sense?
The major currencies already are digital, and have been for decades. The remaining paper money is akin to a higher layer of the protocol stack. But they aren't trust-minimized. And they have no plans to be trust-minimized. That is what makes Bitcoin far superior.https://twitter.com/erlbacher72/status/1167086523315052544 …
-
-
-
No. The basics are the difference between the two settlement protocols (Bitcoin vs. Fedwire, the latter censorable, the former not, the former globally seamless, the latter not) and monetary issuance (again with Bitcoin trust-minimized, vs. for dollar controlled by bankers).
-
I would argue that Bitcoin issuance is controlled by a relatively small group as well. Core devs and exchanges have outsized power.
-
Nope, this is BS, node owners control issuance, and they are incentivized to never change it (if they assumedly hodl).
-
This article might help you understand that Bitcoin is an in inpenetratable fortress of validation:https://hackernoon.com/bitcoin-miners-beware-invalid-blocks-need-not-apply-51c293ee278b …
-
Inb4 "Core controls Bitcoin!!!1!12!!" I'd also recommend perusing this classic:https://medium.com/@pierre_rochard/bitcoin-governance-37e86299470f …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We don't live in a trustless world. Trusting the system that backs Bitcoin is equivalent to trusting the system that backs the USD.
-
One is decentralized and stored on an immutable ledger based on cryptography while the other is centralized and protected by government. I don't think those are equivalent
-
Correct, and these pseudo-cryptocurrency plans don't change these fundamental distinctions in the trust model.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
What about control of on/off-ramps? I can see China controlling this activity.
-
What about it?
-
Not spreading FUD, as I am hopeful in BTC domination, however they will not stand idle. If the goal is SOV, value must be able to transfer. Uses cases beyond that are pointless without transfer. The CCP will have total control-other central banks will follow.
-
This is why it's important to also run and support decentralized ramps like
@bisq_network
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think its a stage of evolution in learning that decentralized money is the only way to go. First they hate/try to ban, then they understand and want their own, and then they realize it wont work and see the only thing that does work.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Nick, have you ever read up on how much of that higher layer is used in the economy world wide. A switch to simply using fiat tokens or digital only in any form, imo would be welcoming in a global crisis on the most human level.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
#digitalcurrency the difference is in custody. With bitcoin you custody your own funds. Everything else requires a third party. The benefit is removing a third party and interfacing directly with the issuing source. We are#one with the source.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That’s a great point many miss. If you live in a developmed world the need for another payment mechanism doesn’t offer much value and isn’t really cheaper or faster. One day possibly but the benefits are much greater than payment or currency.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
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.