Can We Rediscover Better Money? Coming soon.

I recently finished reading Better Money: Gold, Fiat, or Bitcoin?, by Lawrence White. While I’m preparing a proper academic review, maybe someone will appreciate some of the book’s main points. - Strong historical material explaining different implementations of money. - Quite basic supply-and-demand methodology for comparing gold, fiat, and Bitcoin. Yet, the common ground makes for a conscientious analysis, especially for pointing that Bitcoin’s purchasing power volatility is inherent to the system from an economic perspective. Take aways: 1. “A gold standard has the advantage that the global stock supply curve for monetary gold is non-vertical in the short run and nearly horizontal in the long run, providing responses in the quantity that stabilize the purchasing power of gold, but the disadvantage that the supply curve can occasionally shift.” 2. “A fiat standard has the potential advantage that its supply can be deliberately managed to stabilize the price level both in the short run and in the long run, but the disadvantage that has seldom been managed that way in practice, due to the incentives that accompany government control over the quantity of money.” 3. “A Bitcoin standard has the advantage that the Bitcoin supply curve does not shift, but the disadvantage that the supply curve is vertical in both the short run and the long run, implying unstable purchasing power in the face of money demand variations.” White is skeptical about a Bitcoin standard because of purchasing power volatility. He argues that people preferred stable monies over time and that the costs associated are high. “My prediction is that BTC is unlikely to become a commonly used medium of exchange for the same reason, namely that its purchasing-power risk and transaction costs make it unattractive to use as a medium of exchange.” My main critique: fiat money was created by governments (White explains the mechanics of this movement) and they have a higher cost over society in the form of inflation (as he argues with historical evidence). It was done because of political reasons, not economical. I would not overlook people coming to accept higher purchasing power volatility of an eventual Bitcoin standard if governments stay in the last century’s track of increasingly assault over the institution of private property. Does it worth reading? Definitely, it will expand your knowledge about monetary systems and understand some fair critiques about Bitcoin.

Congrats @Luis Schwab 👏 View quoted note →

Have you watched Game of Thrones? It's a fictional representation of what happened in all times and places: small folk have nothing to do and, apart from making jokes, care very little for the quarrels and plots of rulers. Rulers are capable of turning its people outlaws and impose unfair punishment over them for supposed crimes they didn't participate. But after sufficient time, what happens? Either bloodier plots or a war.

Que lama jurídica.

Well, I wasn't expecting nor hoping this would mature so well when I drew it in 2022.

Who pays for Bitcoin block rewards? Bitcoin hodlers do. The payment is hidden by the more apparent appreciation in price when compared to the unit of account (e.g., dollars), but nonetheless real. By contrast to a world in which block rewards are zero, and so miners receive only fees, block rewards expand the pool of BTC in circulation, diluting the purchasing power of each existing BTC unit (holding real demand constant).

I would like to remember that the technologically incompetent decisions we are witnessing in Brazil come from the same court that manages our election system.

Politics under a democracy involve a curious psychology. You trade your incapacity to control market agents that can’t coerce you for the incapacity to control the political agents that can coerce you.

Primal or Damus?

Bitcoin is bad because it's backed by nothing… 🫠 “Over the years, all the governments in thew world, having discovered that gold is, like, rare, decided that it would be more convenient to back their money with something that is easier to come by, namely: nothing." Better Money, L. White

Every online resource is someone else's computer. There's no free lunch. Don't take valuable resources for granted. Consider paying a subscription or donating a small amount if you can. In the case of Wikipedia, you can also contribute by correcting mistakes or writing technical articles. Most "free" services are indeed paid by ads, incentivizing people to create addictive crap instead of true value. We end up with bloated platforms in which the gems are buried in a sea of nonsense. That's also why I'm experimenting with #nostr: zapping gives users the power to decide what is valuable enough to be paid for.

Yesterday, I gave a talk about the principles behind the #bitcoin protocol. This is part 1, covering: 1. the problem we need to solve to build an #economy based on digital transactions; 2. the bitcoin transactions data structures; and 3. the embedded programming language that makes #money programmable.

The more I dig into the nitty-gritty of the protocol, the more convinced I am that #bitcoin truly is the internet of money. It's not only a superior form of money but also a platform for supporting financial applications we can barely imagine right now. Feels just like the #internet in the year 2000, just before we woke up and realized all aspects of our lives depended on it.

AI will kill coding just like restaurants killed home cooking and Spotify killed live performances.

X (formerly Twitter)

MCR (@ammohitchaprana) on X

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has a unique take on what kids should study in school. While computer science and programming were once the must-have skil...

Historical picture revealed today: Satoshi Nakamoto attending the bitcoin++ conference in Argentina in 2024. #btcplusplus #vinteum #base58