pull down to refresh
I don't think Bob is wrong... but he clearly is still thinking this through.
Additionally I don't get that Bob would agree with the BCH comparison. He is a blockchain guy after all.
reply
The specific argument he made for bitcoin being fiat is that the miners validate some things as bitcoin, while not validating other technologically similar things.
I’m thinking about a scenario where bitcoin is money but none of its forkcoins are.
reply
I see. Thanks for the clarification.
I must confess. I took some joy in posting this podcast and title as I know how much we all love to hate on fiat and call everything we don't like fiat or everything that sucks fiat.
Good to get the blood pumping :)
reply
As I expected, I think Bob does a great job explaining everything.
Basically, what defines fiat is the requirement that it be differentiated not by technical properties but by certification.
The idea is that something like bcash is technologically similar to bitcoin but it would not be money because bitcoin miners do not acknowledge it as such.
Bitcoin would fit into Hayek’s framework for private fiat money.
I would like to see someone with more technical knowledge weigh in because there are definitely some points of ambiguity.