• Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m sure if Bitcoin had the largest and most powerful military in the world it would have become the world reserve currency by now

  • ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Though great privacy when used offline, which is also pretty sick and the adoption levels defies reason, it’s virtually usable globally both online and offline.

    • Mubelotix@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Bank notes have unique identifiers allowing the government to track the path of your money. Privacy is dead

      • RealJoL@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        11 months ago

        That also assumes every bill you use will be immediately returned to a bank. You’d have no way of knowing where money comes from and belongs to after one hop. Just make a purchase at the supermarket to exchange a 50 for 45 and you’ve got anonymous cash.

          • db2@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            11 months ago

            They don’t. It wouldn’t benefit the corporation in any way. They’ll only do what makes money and that would cost money with no return.

      • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        American in Spain here. Everybody declines USD. Literally got coffee for free this morning because it was the only shop I’ve seen out of like 100 in the week I’ve been here that wouldn’t take card.

        For a charge of €2.50, when I offered $5 he opted to take nothing instead.

        • STUPIDVIPGUY@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          11 months ago

          I understand it’s easier for you just to use a card, so you don’t think it’s necessary, but it’s probably a good idea to carry a few euros at least

          • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Agreed. We’ve tried. ATMs aren’t working with our cards and every touristy exchange kiosk option charges a shitload in fees. Why not just pay with card when literally every store until our second to last day in the country has been happy to take card? Including bus stations, train stations, taxis, etc. We stopped trying about halfway in when we got to more rural areas and they still happily accepted visa. We wanted to exchange at home before the trip but found out too late that our banks require two weeks notice to exchange currency so they can get it in.

            We just learned today to ask and not assume before ordering. We were asking in the beginning but got complacent after the 100th “of course” response lol.

      • ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        You’d be hard pressed to not find an exchange shop in any major city which is were most people reside these days. And I’ve yet to encounter a currency exchange that doesn’t take USD cash.

          • ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m just saying you can bring a duffel bag of USD with you and in just about any large city world wide you’ll be fine. Some you can transact directly but most you’ll need to locate an exchange first. Still the most versatile currency there is, and more universally accepted than anything else. Sure your VISA card works just about everywhere too but it’s traceable to the max and there are places where USD works far better than a card.

  • Zithero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s funny because thia just proves the metrics used to measure a Cryptos “Viability” apparently have nothing to do with its actual value.

    What matters is it’s trading power… Not it’s circulation or ‘Supoly Cap’

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Paper money is flimsy and wears down quickly. It’s being constantly printed and replaced. This meme is vague and intentionally misleading. Physical money in circulation is replaced and old money destroyed. Constantly. That’s what these figures are about. The wealth inequality, solid point. The rest is just vague word use to make it sound alarming.

    • itsmect@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Simple answer: Because they can, because it’s lucrative, and because it’s not as obvious as raising taxes. Imagine you could legally print money, and when anyones asks about it, you can just dismiss it with: “I’m stimulating the economy”

    • explodicle@local106.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Excuse me sir, this is clearly because of greedflation, not basic supply and demand. /s

    • electriccars@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      By over 30%:

      Source: in2013dollars.com

      Meanwhile…

      $1000 would’ve bought 7.388 BTC in August 2013.

      7.388 BTC today is worth… $193,186.08

      Tell me again which one is the best place to store value?

      Edit: Downvoted for showing facts. Not surprised.

      • itsmect@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Tell me again which one is the best place to store value?

        I don’t think you are ready to hear this yet, but it’s monero :P All jokes aside, bitcoin ain’t terrible, especially compared to the dollar, but I worry that botcoin’s security model will crumble more with each halfing. Transaction fees are already unusable in some cases, yet they barely contribute to the miner rewards. The math doesn’t seem to work out.

        • explodicle@local106.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Lightning has onion routing and lower fees.

          Sidechains (like BIP 300) will allow ring signatures backed by bitcoin.

          We don’t need a new money supply for each new feature.

            • explodicle@local106.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              How much do you think the total security budget needs to be, and why? Where’s the math that doesn’t work out?

              • itsmect@monero.town
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                The security budget is total fiat denominated miner reward of the entire network. The higher it is, the the more resistant bitcoin becomes to 51% attacks.

                As you know, each halfing decreases the block reward, which is currently the largest part of the total miner reward. In order keep a steady security budget, the price and market cap has to double each time as well. But remember, the security budget stays constant, so an ever increasing amount is secured by a relatively lower share.

                Transaction fees make up the remaining tiny share, and I honestly don’t see it growing much. Because the higher this fee becomes, the more people will find ways to avoid it, and just keep it on exchanges, custodial solution or lightning. This reduces the decentralization , the primary feature of bitcoin, and thereby reduces it value proposition.

                All this can be side-stepped by having holders pay a small, program-ably guaranteed fee proportional to their holdings, which is then paid out to miners. Yes, this is similar to inflation, but as long as it is lower than fiat inflation I can be worth the trade off. Considering how cult like bitcoin holder are, I don’t think this is a change they are willing to make, at least not before it’s too late.

                • explodicle@local106.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Why would we need to hold the total security budget steady/constant? We’re currently paying FAR more than necessary. If we assume total fee revenue won’t increase, then Bitcoin fees alone are already more than the entire security budget for some reasonably secure blockchains today.

                  And that’s a very conservative assumption. Lightning and p2p sidechains (which don’t hurt decentralization) increase efficiency, so the Jevons paradox predicts that total transaction fees paid will continue to increase. Lightning is less dependent on quick confirmations than base layer commerce is, reducing the impact of 51% attacks if/when they do happen.

                  When evaluating Monero’s monetary inflation trade-off, its primary competitor is Bitcoin, not the dollar. It’s not very hard at all to do better than the dollar. :-P I for one am strongly in favor of making changes in general (go BIP 300!) but tail emission has been proposed for over a decade and has been repeatedly rejected as unnecessary.