Bitcoin as Medium of Exchange Debate: Saifedean Ammous vs ...

Debunking latest Core rhetoric: Medium of Exchange ≠ Means of Payment

Lately I've seen the "medium of exchange is not the same thing as a method of payment" idea being floated a lot by BTC maxis. Saifdean Ammous tried to pull this out in his debate with a George Selgin. The Bitcoin Observer also mentioned this argument on Twitter in a discussion about Libra's failure. However, according to this paper, the distinction between a medium of exchange and a means of payment is that a means of payment is not necessarily settled immediately. They argue that currency is a medium of exchange, while checks and debit cards are not.
In my opinion, this exposes the fundamental flaw in the argument that "Bitcoin is not a method of payment". It's as if the Coretards are trying to separate Bitcoin UTXOs from the Bitcoin P2P network and Bitcoin mining, and arguing that the network isn't important, and mining is a given. However, without the payment, mining, and P2P validation network, BTC UTXOs have a clear value: ZERO. You can't separate them, the value depends 100% on the network and mining. And as we saw in 2017, when fees rose over $100/transactions, a fair percentage of UTXOs became unspendable, as the fees to move them would be higher than their value.
Of course, we live in a world increasingly dominated by electronic fiat, is this a medium of exchange? Electronic fiat has a fairly tenuous supply and value, and it also depends intrinsically on a payment network that is controlled by governments and corporations. Increasingly, electronic fiat appears to be more a method of spurring labor and creating debt.
Thoughts are welcomed.
submitted by horsebadlyredrawn to btc [link] [comments]

I want BTC to be usable as a currency.

Fortunately, the existing Bitcoin system's capabilities are probably enough to allow for simulating the Currrency app to a nearly arbitrary degree of accuracy; the existing system forms a self-contained, coherent protocol for settlement on which another, higher-level protocol can be built to provide to BTC the properties of currency.
This is not a competing vision; this is not a re-imagining of Bitcoin.
BTC is a unit of account. Bitcoin is a settlement layer. The Lightning Network is a currency layer built on top of Bitcoin; the Lightning Network turns BTC into a currency.
Currency is but one app that can be developed on top of a settlement system; Bitcoin as a settlement layer has been discussed since the dawn of Bitcoin.
Whether or not you call the whole functioning ecosystem 'Bitcoin', the fact remains: There must be a settlement layer, and there must be a currency layer built on top of that settlement layer.
We've got the settlement layer working pretty damn well. Now, we're working on the layer that will provide cheap, high-volume, instantaneous confirmation for transactions that represent usage of BTC as a currency.
submitted by jensuth to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

"Most Bitcoin transactions will occur between banks, to settle net transfers." - Hal Finney Dec. 2010.

Actually there is a very good reason for Bitcoin-backed banks to exist, issuing their own digital cash currency, redeemable for bitcoins. Bitcoin itself cannot scale to have every single financial transaction in the world be broadcast to everyone and included in the block chain. There needs to be a secondary level of payment systems which is lighter weight and more efficient. Likewise, the time needed for Bitcoin transactions to finalize will be impractical for medium to large value purchases.
Bitcoin backed banks will solve these problems. They can work like banks did before nationalization of currency. Different banks can have different policies, some more aggressive, some more conservative. Some would be fractional reserve while others may be 100% Bitcoin backed. Interest rates may vary. Cash from some banks may trade at a discount to that from others.
George Selgin has worked out the theory of competitive free banking in detail, and he argues that such a system would be stable, inflation resistant and self-regulating.
I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash. Most Bitcoin transactions will occur between banks, to settle net transfers. Bitcoin transactions by private individuals will be as rare as... well, as Bitcoin based purchases are today.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2500.msg34211#msg34211
submitted by brg444 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bohmian Dialogue as a Re-solution to the Block Size debate: No Scaling As Scaling

I can't feel it is very true that many devs have already taken such a stance. Well I'd be happen to know there are enough behind the scenes to hold steady, but publicly we see many core devs and proponents wanting to offer a scaling compromise and sometimes a solution. On the one hand I will argue that the general public has not much business telling active developers what they can and should do, but on the other hand there are economic ramifications that SOME developers might not have a strong understanding of.
I don't know if that is silly of me to suggest, I don't know if i have any such understanding...but...
I have argued, which is inline with what finney was projecting for bitcoin in regard to george selgins commodity money (and szabo hayek smith), that bitcoin already has the capability to arise to function as a high value settlement system, and that if the properties that allow it to do so are preserved then such a system will spark the events as described by John Nash.
When we understand the argument and the ends Nash explains it is the only clearly rational and optimal path for humanity. And so this is the FOUNDED argument for the direction we should take bitcoin. This suggests the conflict exists solely because we are ignorant to the insight Nash has left us NOT because one side is correct and the other is not.
Our goal is wrong.
The goal shouldn't be to optimize bitcoin, but rather to align it was the Nashian observation.
Lastly, I suggest that the want to somehow increase, or effectively increase, bitcoin's transactional capacity comes about from a tacitly held belief that such a change would increase the value and utility of the network. Obviously to some extent you disagree with this faction of supports of this argument....
Dialogue, specifically bohmian dialogue, is a protocol for relieving groups of their tacitly held beliefs. I call for a small handful (perhaps more than 5 and less than 10) of, at least fairly reputable, members to enter into dialogue and open the discussion of whether or not bitcoin should be scaled for tx throughput and whether or not it can be direction to function as the premise of Nash's argument.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2015696.msg20100149#msg20100149
submitted by pokertravis to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Interesting prediction from Hal Finney about "Bitcoin-backed banks (...) issuing their own digital cash (...)" and more efficient systems

This quote is from 2010:
"Actually there is a very good reason for Bitcoin-backed banks to exist, issuing their own digital cash currency, redeemable for bitcoins. Bitcoin itself cannot scale to have every single financial transaction in the world be broadcast to everyone and included in the block chain. There needs to be a secondary level of payment systems which is lighter weight and more efficient. Likewise, the time needed for Bitcoin transactions to finalize will be impractical for medium to large value purchases.
Bitcoin backed banks will solve these problems. They can work like banks did before nationalization of currency. Different banks can have different policies, some more aggressive, some more conservative. Some would be fractional reserve while others may be 100% Bitcoin backed. Interest rates may vary. Cash from some banks may trade at a discount to that from others.
George Selgin has worked out the theory of competitive free banking in detail, and he argues that such a system would be stable, inflation resistant and self-regulating.
I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash. Most Bitcoin transactions will occur between banks, to settle net transfers. Bitcoin transactions by private individuals will be as rare as... well, as Bitcoin based purchases are today." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2500.msg34211#msg34211
About Hal Finney: Harold Thomas Finney II (May 4, 1956 – August 28, 2014) was a developer for PGP Corporation, and was the second developer hired after Phil Zimmermann. In his early career, he was credited as lead developer on several console games. He also was an early bitcoin user and received the first bitcoin transaction from bitcoin's creator Satoshi Nakamoto. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Finney_(computer_scientist)
submitted by Ph03n1xII to lykke [link] [comments]

Money Without Boundaries, How Blockchain Will Facilitate the Denationalisation of Money with... Hidden Forces - YouTube The Future - Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies How Bitcoin Helps Free Speech  Learn Liberty

George Selgin, Director Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives The Cato Institute Washington, DC 20005 November 12, 2014 Prepared for Hillsdale University’s 2014 Free Market Forum, Indianapolis, Indiana, October 23-25. !! Anita Folsom, in inviting me to take part in this year’s Free Market Forum, originally suggested that I write about the problems of Bitcoin. Although I suppose I ... Bitcoin's intrinsic value has been heavily discussed in the crypto community this week following a remark by the governor of the Bank of England suggesting that the cryptocurrency may have no ... George A. Selgin. Works Published in Speeches and Presentations Mises Daily Article Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics Review of Austrian Economics, Volumes 1-10. George Selgin is a Senior Fellow and director of the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at the Cato Institute. Cato’s Middle for Financial and Monetary Choices director George Selgin chimed in: In fact no items have ‘intrinsic’ price. Some (like all fiat cash) additionally lack ‘non-monetary use price’ … the Financial institution of England’s statement that bitcoin lacks intrinsic price is an example of the pot calling the kettle black. Doesn't he mean deflation? Because Bitcoin's value has been increasing, therefore prices would decrease. 2017-08-18T16:12:22Z. Users who like Show 11: George Selgin - Money, Banking & Bitcoin; Users who reposted Show 11: George Selgin - Money, Banking & Bitcoin; Playlists containing Show 11: George Selgin - Money, Banking & Bitcoin

[index] [190] [34003] [29959] [7994] [42272] [30257] [45785] [12278] [45803] [3256]

Money Without Boundaries, How Blockchain Will Facilitate the Denationalisation of Money with...

Spicy cryptocurrency news and fintech analysis. Top coverage of p2p cash, tokens, decentralized apps, and legacy finance. Voices of Liberty's Joe Gressis speaks with economics professors George Selgin and William J. Luther, and cryptocurrency enthusiasts Andreas Antonopoulos, Am... Please leave your questions in the comments below! Bitcoin is a truly revolutionary technology. It's "censorship-resistant," because it can be used to send m... Bitcoin (BTC) Analysis. Cryptocurrency Technical Analysis and Cryptocurrency News. Bitcoin Investors Is It Time To GET OUT?? Or will bitcoin have a bull market in 2020. New Crypto Course! https ... This episode is about the creation of a new global currency. Unlike traditional currencies, such as the dollar, yen, or euro, this currency strives to be a risk-free store of value. And unlike ...

#