pull down to refresh
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
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.