pull down to refresh
417 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 28 Jan \ on: The Game Theory of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bitcoin
I don't really see it. There's already a USG-sanctioned "chain" and that's the traditional financial system. Why would a USG controlled fork of Bitcoin fare better than fiat, with all its current advantages in ease-of-use?
I'm not saying some people won't stay with the USG fork. And I'm not saying the fork will die in one night. But in the long run, I don't really see what a USG-controlled fork offers as a value proposition and I'm not sure it'd be sustainable.
Long story short, Bitcoin is a dumb way to do things unless you care about decentralization. If it becomes centralized, then what's even the point.
reply
Yeah, the timing of when things happen is always tricky. Something can be unsustainable, but still persist for a long time, especially if a lot of investment and infra was put into it already.
That being said, if USG made a fork, I think I'd just treat it as another fiat. I'd still continue to invest in the "true chain", but I'd happily use my "USG-coins" for purchases or whatever as long as the network persists.
The sad thing is that the CEX's will probably call USG-coin "Bitcoin", and those of us holding onto the "true chain" will need to adopt some other name, for the time-being.
reply
Yeah, the timing of when things happen is always tricky. Something can be unsustainable, but still persist for a long time, especially if a lot of investment and infra was put into it already.
Sounds like eth
reply