this is not what people mean when they say "it isn't real money". strawman argument is unconvincing. if you could pay for the taxi ride with cryptocurrency it would be about as real as fiat currency, but you can't, so it isn't.https://twitter.com/julian0liver/status/958080067233615872 …
yes, that's a very good reason why nobody wants to use it as currency, but there are definitely examples of fiat currencies having similar volatility (Venezuela right now comes to mind). I was responding to the stated reason in the example though.
-
-
Exactly,Venezula-type hyperinflation is one of the marks of a failed currency.I’d have no issue with calling BitCoin a“terrible currency” :)
-
well, it would be a terrible currency if you could even buy anything with it besides darknet drugs and malware ransoms.
-
Currency:mainly value storage,bc of government guarantee of stability. Commodity: Item gaining value through trade,according t supply/demand
-
No. Definitely not. Those aren't reasonable definitions of either of those words and they aren't reasonable descriptions of the characteristics of things we use those words for.
-
Currency refers to the trait of an object of "being generally accepted", where money currency is generally accepted for commercial exchanges, but currency can apply more broadly, like "this idea has cultural currency".
-
Commodity refers to the trait of an object as being generally fungible, a member of a class without distinguishing characteristics.
-
Cryptocoins are not generally accepted for commercial exchanges right now, thus not money currency. They are basically commodities though, but not because it gains value through trade (that's a trait of market valuations, not commodities).
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.