Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
I think a fee market that is relative to demand for blockspace is perfectly reasonable... but not today. We're too small to sustain the demand in the face of countless competitors. Bitcoin doesn't have the benefit of the periodic table, if we don't capture share while miners are subsidized and incentivized to secure and process transactions... it becomes like rpietila's castle game, with you and a few thousand others trading pogs back and forth.
Again you seem to confuse what it is you'd like to or perceive Bitcoin should compete with and what Bitcoin's unique value and properties are.
If we can't agree on this I guess we can never agree on the rest but my opinion is we want Bitcoin to compete with gold, offshore saving accounts, safe havens of all sort , therein lies the value (and the "moon" valuations), not competing with VISA/Mastercard or Square.
I didn't reply with a hope to change your mind. But I do hope we can build a bridge from the middle of the river
I'm just thinking you are hoping to sell 1. the wrong people onto Bitcoin using 2. the wrong "features" of Bitcoin. This necessarily creates a steep obstacle to the "adoption" you are wishing for.
To be quite honest I have been guilty of this in the past and have long maintained this delusion that Bitcoin was somehow this fantastic payment network that would replace credit cards, etc etc. Until I finally came to sense and understood what the true value of it was. Note that you shouldn't forego your dreams of moon because of this. The markets I am suggesting we target are enormously more valuable than replacing simple payment processors!
Peer to Peer Electronic Cash System
vs
Peer to Peer Electronic Wealth Storage System
I think we've distilled it down. I also think it can be both, but the former facilitates the latter.
Every thread seems to be a mixed topic thread recently
A $5 variation in price for days on end will do that.
I was hoping you'd bring this up.
Did we ever consider what Satoshi insinuated by "cash"?
Is it because of the ability to be easily transferable at low cost or because of its nature as a bearer instrument free of censorship from authorities or third parties?
After all, Bitcoin is proposed as a solution to the Byzantine Generals problem isn't it? I think Satoshi makes it pretty clear the essence of his proposition is to remove trust from transactions.
It makes sense considering his design of the system that Bitcoin can not ever reach the ubiquity of cash in transactions worldwide. This would necessitate such as scale as to effectively centralize Bitcoin and therefore defeats the original attempt to remove trust. Even the proposition to remove trust is admittedly naive. There exists inherent trust in Bitcoin as it exist. We currently trust a handful of miners to behave according to everyone's interest and game theory suggest they should do so provided with the right incentives but what happens if they somehow become coerced into taking a different road?