Hacker News Reader

Given equal liquidity, a purer market should deliver less volatility than an actively managed one.

That reads like a credo.

Both systems contain massive speculator involvement. Only one system contains single overarching actor with ability to manipulate values at will.

Pretty obvious which will be more stable.

History shows pretty clearly that actively managed currencies with a central bank are far more stable than for example gold or bitcoin. I don't see how you can argue otherwise.

@gahahaha

All historic gold currencies I know of were actively managed: Debasement, re-pegging, temporary abandonment to pay off debts via inflation - all were common practice under gold standard.

None are (should be) possible with Bitcoin.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com