10 sats \ 6 replies \ @anon 8h \ on: Why stablecoins and stablechannels are dumb bitcoin
Extra third parties -> Yep
Store of Value -> "Patience heals the volatility wound." when bitcoin is down 75%, sadly, patience doesn't heal mortgage payments and grocery bills
Medium of exchange -> "The same problems afflict all options" ... not true, wildly different problems, trust assumptions, UX, and fees.
Unit of account -> Unit of account is more than prices in stores. For example contracts and financial assets. Tech hasn't solved that.
when bitcoin is down 75%, sadly, patience doesn't heal mortgage payments and grocery bills
Wow! I didn't know that.
Since 2009 how much do you think Bitcoin has dropped in value in terms of Bitcoin?
Or is it that dollar has been falling at 90 degree against Bitcoin?
Difference in perspective.
Don't think gains and loses. Think of changing to the real money. Fiat is a scam not money.
Money is what that can increase its worth (not value), fiat does opposite.
reply
when bitcoin is down 75%, sadly, patience doesn't heal mortgage payments and grocery bills
also true of fiat currency
maybe use the better money since both have the risk of dropping by 75%
not true, wildly different problems, trust assumptions, UX, and fees
Thank you for naming three specific problems, trust assumptions, UX, and fees. I assume you are saying bitcoin is worse than stablecoins and stablechannels in these three categories. Is that correct? And are you willing to defend that statement against my criticisms? I think bitcoin has better trust assumptions, better UX, and better fees than stablecoins and stablechannels. If you think it's worse, why?
Unit of account is more than prices in stores. For example contracts and financial assets. Tech hasn't solved that.
Seems like volatility clauses fix that
reply
also true of fiat currency
No, is not true for the stablecoin with ~99% market dominance, USD. The chances of BTC dropping 75% in one year are much higher. Get real.
I assume you are saying bitcoin is worse on [trust assumptions, UX, fees]?
Trust assumption is better with bitcoin vs. stablecoins. And depends on circumstances of payments obviously, but in many cases yes: BTC has worse UX and worse fees vs. stablecoins.
Seems like volatility clauses fix that
Volatility clauses vs. what, the dollar? AKA unit of account.
reply
The chances of BTC dropping 75% in one year are much higher. Get real.
I don't think so. The dollar's value is propped up by people who are not trustworthy. It could easily drop 75% in a year. It's not a matter of chance; it's a matter of who makes the decisions.
Trust assumption is better with bitcoin vs. stablecoins
Agreed
in many cases yes: BTC has worse UX and worse fees vs. stablecoins.
If the cases are many, surely you can name one
Volatility clauses vs. what, the dollar? AKA unit of account
Good point
reply
I don't think so. The dollar's value is propped up by people who are not trustworthy. It could easily drop 75% in a year. It's not a matter of chance; it's a matter of who makes the decisions.
If that happened the whole financial system would collapse and bring bitcoin down with it. Everything is ran on confidence which includes bitcoin as well.
reply
You seem to be referring to the price of bitcoin. What do you mean bring bitcoin down? In the face of total fiat disaster you better believe blocks are still going to be filled with transactions. Which is sort of the point, right?
reply