0 sats \ 5 replies \ @MaaliMKen OP 8 Jul \ parent \ on: Is their value to geo-locking bitcoins to facilitate localized circularity? bitcoin
You have to admit, what the Koreans are doing helps them survive the Fed's tightening grip on dollar debt outflows.
BTC needs something like this. A way to hide from the price shocks of Federal Reserve policies. And this idea is it.
Yeah that's the goal... But side effects of this kind of interventionist monetary policy are plentiful. E.g. they now have to use money from the state pension to buy back dollar reserves to protect the krw. It'll work until it doesn't... while having potentially gambled away a big portion of Koreans pensions. The whole point of Bitcoin is to get rid of interventionist monetary policies. Humans are notoriously bad at predicting the outcomes of such decisions.
Benake is the Kissinger of monetary intervention!~~ /s
reply
You fail to realise Bitcoiners themselves, especially devs, do the interventionism.
Now dollar debt minimization is good if the close-door policy is aimed at boosting local consumption, growth and development. The Chinese have done this well and quite frankly, now, couldn't care less where the Federal debt winds blow.
reply
By the way, I also don't believe the free market is efficient at finding the optimal conditions that benefit everyone. In that sense, I'm probably quite different from the typical free-market absolutist you'd find here.
On some level, I agree that some policies implemented by the Korean government have effectively protected the country from being invaded by Google, Facebook, Uber, etc... Most people prefer using local alternatives that have been able to develop while the government was using a close-door policy on foreign tech. Quite similar to what China has been doing quite effectively.
It's a fine balance between destructive interference and potentially beneficial interference. Beneficial often comes at unintended long-term costs.
Also, I fail to see how Bitcoin devs would be able to implement such things. Already now people complain about the disproportionate power Bitcoin core developers have over potential other implementations. Would you see it as some kind of DAO structure where every Bitcoin holder would have a voting right as to what policies to implement? Please refer me to some other answers in this thread if you've already addressed this.
reply
Really I see it like multisig. You do it if you want to, and leave it if you don't.
I have no concrete idea yet of how it would be implemented, but I am willing to bet it is a swell idea worth pursuing, for technical and intellectual value.
reply
Hello @south_korea_ln, I actually coded my idea and made a video. Check it out - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaFZKtCXrkI
What do you think?
Here wondering how long my singular satoshi will take to pay back all those $34 trillion at that rate in the video :)
reply