Hacker News Reader

Comment by matltc | Hacker News Reader

Of course the same can be said for BTC: finite supply, needs to be mined.

Unlike gold, the "finite supply" of BTC is socially constructed.

That's my whole argument for gold. The finite supply isn't socially constructed, and getting more requires building real infrastructure.

1. The supply is nonetheless constrained and immutably fixed; what is the relevance of whether it is by contract or law of nature?

2. What do you mean by "real" infrastructure? Crypto-mining rigs are no less real than actual mines.

My argument would be that gold's value is as much a social construct as that of crypto; value is just a function of supply and demand.

I'm guessing you might post that there is a third input: utility. "Currency" is one use for gold, but can certainly serve many purposes, whereas crypto coins are strictly used as currency. That fact is presumably taken into account by a coin's price; nonetheless, it still has whatever value the market says it has at any time.

Except none of the crypto "currency" is used as currency at all, and never will. It's used as a crypto asset. For speculation. Or even worse, straight up fraud. The only time I heard crypto was used as currency, is the infamous pizza a decade ago

Computer programs and algorithms are the last thing that I would call "socially constructed".

The meaning behind them are, though. When car alarms was a big thing, it might wail, and the idea was people would have a look to see if somebody was trying to steal your car, but at the end it was mostly false alarms. So the wailing got the reaction of "Not that shit again!".

Meanwhile a TSA scanner's beep get treated as "this person is bringing a problem.".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com