pull down to refresh

#Better tech isn't better for adoption (in the short run)
Bitcoiners are technical people. We focus on making Bitcoin itself work better:
  1. More nodes, like 100.000 is not enough?
  2. Better and more private node data propagation,see Dandelion
  3. Fixing transactional bugs, like malleability which was fixed in the SegWit update
  4. Scaling for the masses by building out Lightning, check the wonderful blog posts of the Breez team.
This is all nice and dandy, but it's of little benefit to the average user today. I know Product Managers will always reference to "the average user" whom we all know, does not in fact exist. But still, let me tell you the number one problem that I run into, every time that I (a white guy living in Europe) try to "orange pill" someone into Bitcoin:
  1. But the price fluctuates too much.
That's it. That is the number one complaint.
Of course anyone who has been in Bitcoin will know that over time bitcoin's price will indeed move compared to fiat currencies, but only upwards. But still, this is what a lot of people focus on. For daily use they don't want their currency of choice to fluctuate at all. What they do want however, is to receive a little interest on money in their account.
Now, knowing that people want to receive interest, and do not want to see the price of their coins fluctuate, we can ask ourselves "what is a proper solution?"
I think the answer is deceptively simple: We need a fully-bitcoin-backed-decentralized-anonymous-private-cash-like-stable-coin. Yes, you heard it here first: we need a better stable coin.
In my mind the MakerDAO project with their DAI/SAI stable coin got a lot of things right, but not all:
  1. To run the smart contract they built on Ethereum. Running a smart contract on Layer 1 is a bad idea because it makes you vulnerable to price hikes ("gas price" in ETH parlour) to execute the smart contract.
  2. Being built on Ethereum meant that "addresses" can be blocked from receiving or sending coins. This goes against the "digital cash" idea. After all: in cash there is no "account" or "address" that can be blocked.
  3. To give value to the stable coins certain assets need to be "stacked". In version 1 of DAI this asset was Ethereum. In version 2 (called Multi Collateral DAI) other ERC-20 token assets can be added into the mix. Both Ethereum and other ERC-20 tokens in general have one big problem, though: they depend on Ethereum to work at all. (One could argue that the price of most ERC-20 tokens keeps falling and therefore they are a terrible asset to stake, but I'm not getting into that now...)
  4. By following the United States Dollar the stable coin is not really stable at all, but suffers from 1-15% inflation per year.
How do we overcome all these weaknesses?
  1. Make a stable coin that only runs only on a 2nd/3rd layer of bitcoin. Projects like these come to mind:
    1. Stacks, formerly Blockstack
    2. Echo
    3. Rootstock (RSK)
  2. Smart contracts have necessarily "addresses" which means that an address can be blocked. To overcome this weakness one would like to have a legacy bitcoin address fallback, preferably to a P2EP (pay-to-end-point) privacy preserving address.
  3. By locking up more and more Bitcoins in an contract like outlined above, the BTC price itself will become more and more stable over time.
  4. Following a real world asset like the US Dollar or the Euro has a drawback: it is subject to inflation. But having an "account" on the 2nd/3rd layer stable coin platform has advantages too:
    1. You can earn/receive more and more of those stable coins as the underlying asset (bitcoin) keeps rising in value.
    2. So even if the USD is subject to inflation, and real world prices are rising, this is offset by your account showing you received more and more stable coins as "interest"
Please, peeps, discuss...
Teach them about supply side stability and sound money. Bitcoin is saving technology, a saving mindset and longer time horizon is essential for adoption.
1 BTC = 100,000,000 sats and tomorrow 1 BTC will be 100,000,000 sats. This is the stability that matters.
Once you think in sats and begin stacking as your savings, the volatility issue only remains within the fiat matrix where prices generally go up. Meanwhile, in (bitcoiner) reality prices generally go down over time.
reply
We need to price things and build out the infrastructure for POS. This involves using sats as a point of reference. Making POS systems that accept it and price things in it. It will be dynamic to start so this means prices need to dynamic tagging on goods. It’s a user experience problem. Prices fluctuate at stores all the times this is no different than fiat. 1 sat = 1 sat
I recall the suredbits guys talking about doing something like this with a DLC on lightning. Essentially you’d have a lightning channel that would auto rebalance with your peer to keep your $usd value stable.
My favorite possible solution to this problem is "spacechains," explained here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY8CDEpg5_U Relies on OP_CTV, which will likely be up for speedy trial after Taproot activates in November. You can read more about OP_CTV here: https://utxos.org/ Another interesting, and also controversial proposal for a sidechain where some kind of stablecoin could be implemented is here: https://www.drivechain.info/
Lots of possibilities, the future is bright--but I am very skeptical of RSK and Stacks at this time--I honestly feel like it needs to survive about 5-10 years to prove it's stability and potential. Not familiar with Echo, I'll have to look into that.
I don't know why I am only finding out about them now... But a platform that does just this exists already 🙈
They are called "Money On Chain" (okay bad name, terrible SEO, for one thing) and they have a stable coin (pegged to US Dollars) that is called "Dollar On Chain" (short: DOC).
To run their smart contracts they use RSK (formerly Rootstock) and you can "mint" your own DOC by first staking BTC into RBTC and then sending the RBTC to the MOC/DOC contract...
reply
Forecasting continued volatility is troublesome, but at present you it's certainly a problem.
I wish I could say more about stablecoins generally. I don't have any requisite knowledge. They're obviously something people value and IMO are not scams given there are valid use cases - so it'd be nice to see parity on Bitcoin in some form. There have to be projects already doing this though.
reply