Quote from: danielpbarron on January 27, 2015, 04:31:49 PM

Quote from: NxtChg on January 27, 2015, 04:12:43 PM

Does keeping the block size lead to less adoption?
Does less adoption lead to a less popular network?
Does a less popular network undermine the value of each bitcoin?

No, no, and no. You're working on the assumption that bitcoin depends on the poor, when it's the poor that depend on bitcoin. Isn't it the 1% that controls most of the wealth in the world? So then how are the other 99% supposed to support the price of bitcoin with their coffee purchases? They don't even have savings, let alone liquid cash to invest in wild speculations. But they will use bitcoin regardless, not because it's faster than credit cards, and not because its fees are lower. They will use bitcoin because it is sound money. Maybe they won't use it directly (tx on the blockchain), but they will have bank accounts with debit cards denominated in bitcoin. Maybe there will even be privately issued paper notes as receipts for a bitcoin deposit (the way dollars used to be with gold). But all of that is for naught if the rules governing bitcoin are allowed to change; it would just be a less efficient version of the Federal Reserve, and I don't think anyone will want to invest in that. Strict adherence to the original set of rules is the best course of action for "mass adoption."

Nicely said. I was writing my reply at the same time and it seems like we're on the same page.

Many in the community are technologically gifted but lack a firm understanding of hard money and its importance in promoting freedom and global prosperity. Clearly Satoshi understood the importance of hard money.

I'd also love to know the economists that Gavin was referring to in his exchange with Davout. Do you think it was Krugman? Wink