reply on: What bitcoin can't do (and can do) \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

51 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 12 Dec \ on: What bitcoin can't do (and can do) bitcoin_beginners

I like this post but have some thoughts with a bit of nuance to share.

Bitcoin doesn’t destroy banks. Let’s recall Satoshi Nakamoto’s words in the original whitepaper, where at no point is the destruction of anything proposed—it simply offers a viable alternative to no longer depend on institutions. In fact, today, we have banks exposing their clients to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

The incentive structures of bitcoin as adoption grows will likely transform bitcoin. I think its a logical mistake to assume Satoshi was correct about everything or that x thing wasn't something he foresaw. Satoshi is and was not a deity. Just a human. I think its clear that bitcoin was designed to replace fiat money which is created and controlled by the banking systems of the world.

There's a lot of debate about banking in a bitcoin world. Personally, today I am of the opinion that there will always be banks of some sort because people prefer to delegate some things to experts rather than valuing self-sovereignty. I don't see this changing anytime soon. But IMO banks are the biggest evil in the world. Central banks are a different story. Far to much power is centralized in these institutions and bitcoin I hope will destroy that system.

Bitcoin doesn’t make you (bi)millionaire. Ironically, Bitcoin’s function to protect us from inflation through its salability in time and space makes our money “worth more,” but it’s not because we’ve earned interest—it’s because other currencies lose value relative to Bitcoin.

This is partially true. It is true that people are measuring bitcoin with fiat which has no bottom. But, if you measure bitcoin with purchasing power it is actually increasing in market value over time. It is a drastic increase. Why this increase? Because humanity is just in the first 0.5% of the way to understanding how useful and powerful bitcoin is. The market is still discovering the value of bitcoin. The truth is, no one knows what that value actually is yet? One human or a group cannot out calculate the free market pricing system.

Bitcoin doesn’t prevent wars. In fact, during wars, it’s often better to pay with Bitcoin, as demonstrated in Ukraine, where Bitcoiners, shitcoiners, and others raised funds for weapons. Bitcoin is money that can be used in war and peace alike. It’s a protocol/money that doesn’t distinguish between the two.

I agree that bitcoin doesn't or won't prevent wars but sound money limits the size of wars. The money printer fuels endless wars. The banking system makes massive profits off of war debts. This is all fueled by fiat. I don't have the resources handy but moving off of gold pegged money is what allowed the world powers to increase the size and scope of conflicts. So yeah, bitcoin doesn't end war but it sure would help minimize them.

58 sats \ 1 reply \ @softglitter2d OP 12 Dec

Wow. Nice views. To strenght the debate...

I think its clear that bitcoin was designed to replace fiat money which is created and controlled by the banking systems of the world. (...) But IMO banks are the biggest evil in the world. Central banks are a different story. Far to much power is centralized in these institutions and bitcoin I hope will destroy that system

Agreed. Institutions around bitcoin is inevitable at least for the next 10 years of development. I think this prevails because banks are in the business of looking profit working with currencies...so, in the end, banks are going to do what they always does, well...at least what they were doing it for the last 500 years: follow the money.

Do I think banks have lost their moral compass? Yes sir, I think banks today are not here to help mankind and accelerate transactions or onboard people. Banks are ethic and morally broken¹ but that doesn't mean they lost their capacity to transform themselves.

I wrote about the BIS (central bank of all central banks) and their relationship with genocide. See for #561669 more ↩

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 12 Dec

I don't think we disagree. I think banks will adapt or die is my point. But central banks are not the same. I believe many will be destroyed if not all.

Footnotes