Hacker News Reader

Comment by zupa-hu | Hacker News Reader

I'm confused. Gresham's law sais "bad money drives out good". Inflation is bad, so from that follows that the money that inflates more will be more used. Okay, I buy that.

Then this:

> When the singularity is reached, I think people will be more likely to choose to spend their inflationary fiat currency instead of their deflationary cryptocurrency.

I'm lost here. People already prefer to spend USD over Bitcoin. So I understand the change would be if Bitcoin inflates faster, because then people will prefer to spend Bitcoin. But the article sais the opposite.

Or doesn't "stable against USD" mean that Bitcoin will inflate/deflat at around the same rate as USD?

Interesting article, I'd love to understand it! Anyone?

View on HN

I thought the same thing, the core idea of this article is in direct opposition of its conclusion.

Bitcoin is going up in value, and according to the market predictions it will go way higher, so it's deflationary.

Bitcoin holders will prefer to spend cash money to bitcoins anytime in speculation of future gains.

I see bitcoin more of a speculative investment at the moment, than a type of currency. Only the ones that are riding the bitcoin trains seems to think this is the future of money. Outside that bubble nobody really uses it.

Bitcoin seems like an investment in proving the ideas that may eventually come to form a truly practical cryptocurrency.

Yes. Thank you. I honestly feel like it is a solution seeking a problem. Not to say it isn't solving any problems already, but I think it's still seeking a big enough problem that the general public starts paying attention and believing in its value.

Just as an example: I don't see why the US government couldn't adopt the best parts of crypto (e.g. the public ledger) but also be able to control it and how that kind of move wouldn't make it instantly the most trusted cryptocurrency vs all the ones we speculate on today.

The interesting part for me is the more people speculate, the higher the price becomes, and the higher the price becomes, the more useful it is in the institutional level because the markets are deeper.

I think its unfair to dismiss the currency aspect of bitcoin. The use case for the developed world is 95% speculation 5% buying contraband online however, for people in Venezuela[1], girls learning to code in Afghanistan[2], or women in Saudi Arabi who can't legally open a bank account, Bitcoin is solving problems that under banked people have now. Of course the ecosystem needs to mature so grandma can use it safely, but that will come with time.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/bitcoin-mining-is-popular-in... [2] https://www.coindesk.com/how-bitcoin-helps-afghan-girls-achi...

I think it has high utility anywhere outside of the US and EU. There are billions of people that don't have access to stable currencies or reasonable banking.

Sure, but access to reasonable banking is also highly correlated to access to ability to actually buy things with BTC or convert BTC to spendable money.

I suspect that is not you who is confused, but the author of the article.

I don't think he has a good understanding of what money is or how it works.

It seems he thinks that there is limited quantity of dollars (or whatever) stacked under mattresses or something and that people is going to start spending them in order not to get stuck with them. It's funny.

I certainly may well be confused. I don't have an economics degree and just find the field fascinating. One reason I put it here is that there are many bright people not seemingly hesitant to share their opinion. Thanks for this! Mind expounding further?

No, I don't think you misunderstood - I may have just not clear. Yes, it's the case now where people prefer to spend their deflationary USD, but I think it's primarily because many of us are speculating on the price of BTC. If and when btc is stable enough against USD, the trend of spending USD will continue but for a different reason: the USD's inflation. Hope I explained well.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com