Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
SaberhagenTheNameless | 5 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Bitcoin has only been around ~15 years. This is all still an experiment. You can't technically guarantee Store of Value. Controlling supply alone isn't enough. SoV is also also a function of demand (which is subjective so can't be controlled) and larger players can always manipulate price like they do with traditional finance especially when large CEXes are involved.

>A vital function of Bitcoin is the game theory level. Bitcoin has a design that allows it to pressure jurisdictions towards liberty-oriented policies *because* it is the best store of value.

"Bitcoin is therefore inherently a black market money. Its security architecture necessarily assumes it is operating without state permission."

https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Permissionless-Principle
▲ ▼
Leo Fernevak | 5 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Absolutely.

If we were to hard-fork Bitcoin into BTC-private, I wouldn't assume that the fork can compete with Bitcoin as a SoV. The market price for Monero may give an indication of what the market is willing to pay for a 100% privacy coin.

And yes, Bitcoin does not need permission. Its protocol is designed in a way that it can become a global SoV.

It is doubtful if the market needs another Monero. It is clear that the market wants Bitcoin as it is.
▲ ▼
SaberhagenTheNameless | 5 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 Bitcoin doesn't require permission, but white markets do. We can ignore any transactions occurring there as transient (see recent events). That leaves us with black markets as the only place anyone is guaranteed to be able to use Bitcoin without permission.

Regulators can impose whatever arbitrary rules they want on white market transactions (including banning Bitcoin transactions there). Therefore, the continuing takeover of cryptocurrencies like Monero on darknets is a HUGE sign that Bitcoin is failing its main value proposition.

The SoV narrative is backwards and a bit premature imo. If SoV holds up I can potentially see nations using Bitcoin between each other, but feels naive to believe they would allow their citizens the same privilege with no restrictions (as it undermines their power). Any citizens would have to break the law to do that - and now were back to black markets
▲ ▼
Leo Fernevak | 5 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 Game theory involves competition between nation states.

Bitcoin doen't need to take the role of Monero. In fact, it is better that both roles are intact and are tested for their respective purposes.

I wrote a general outline of how the game theory can be expected to play out:

nostr:nevent1qqsyp39g9ykyclhvg2xxq3m5e6speyjdumzwk2llp2q3r630jkxrj5spz3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wcpzqg75jw2xzfv9wpk89yy2tcusf723wl4qs7cr9hdle55xyvzv0kvrqvzqqqqqqy4nmmqn