10 sats \ 3 replies \ @south_korea_ln 24 May \ parent \ on: Describe the nature of the 5 years preceding hyperbitcoinization as you see them bitcoin
I obviously haven't thought about hyperbitcoinization much, likely because I don't think it'll happen in my lifetime (if ever). But as an intellectual exercise, you raise some interesting points. I do not have the answers to those, hence displaying my ignorance.
Extensive re-negotiation it'll be then. That happens all the time in business. Lawyers love this kind of shit. That's their raison-d'etre. Add a clause that says that if this or this happens, the contract becomes void and has to be renegotiated. But as with anything for which no precedent exists, it's very likely it'll be a clusterfuck for a while. But ways will be found. I'm not very apocalyptic or fatalist, by nature.
As a side note, I'm not sure as to the reason of your side note on me being akin to a bcasher~~
The sidenote is about the fixation on a certain class of contract that is not representative of the broader scope of economic activities that exist in the world.
Add a clause that says that if this or this happens, the contract becomes void and has to be renegotiated.
This is very costly. Imagine if you are trying to build a car, but everyday, you have to spend half of your time renegotiating, or you have 20% of your staff dedicated to renegotiating and your supply chain team bloats 10x. These costs go to the consumer, and I actually do not believe you maintain the same timelines. Things just break and become dysfunctional, even perhaps while net output continues to grow.
We are seeing the beginning of this today, and as it gets worse, the marginal value and profit that can be attained by networks of economic actors who can more efficiently solve this problem will wipe out those that do not. I am not saying anything is apocalyptic, quite the opposite. Many bitcoiners say "NGU, NGU, NGU, then mini-apocalypse (glad I will be rich enough to weather that), and then beautiful bitcoin standard after the turmoil". The mini-apocalypse is actually an intellectual crutch for EXIT and disengagement with the nature of the world, and continued ignorance as to the fact that people will inevitably solve these problems, and the solution inherently cannot be defined purely in terms of bitcoin, as that is the definition of the years preceding hyperbitcoinization!
Your response points to one more reason I find it worthwhile to explore the true nature of the transition: the more it is viewed as an opaque boogeyman, the more people will see "oh, I don't know if hyperbitcoinization will ever happen, or at least not in my lifetime". Electricity was marketed as being terrifying, but now it is understood and tame.
To the nocoiner, bitcoin is terrifying, and even to the bitcoiner, hyperbitcoinization is often terrifying, so like a nocoiner pretending bitcoin surely cannot be real, the scared bitcoiner pretends hyperbitcoinization cannot be real or relevant to them.
Ever since I got into bitcoin in 2017, I understood hyperbitcoinization was coming -- so much so that in December as the price started ripping, I thought, "whew, that was lucky -- got in just at the nick of time," haha. And ever since understanding the fourth function of money, I have had a clear understanding of the transition and remain baffled by the fact that even people who have been around longer than me or claim to want to accelerate bitcoin or claim to be fans of economy theory, have no interest in understanding these basic principles of economics.
https://heaviside.substack.com/p/the-forgotten-fourth-function-of
reply
Side note or chain lol
reply
Tend to agree
reply