Replies (58)
Itβs what the purpose of gold was for thousands of years.
Why are we no longer on a gold standard?
This is essentially the conclusion I came to a long time ago. The anarchocapitalist utopia so many early bitcoiners espoused is basically unachievable in an adversarial world.
Dismantling a modern state creates a vacuum of power that will be instantly filled by surrounding powers, and the experiment in non-governance immediately dissolves.
The same game theory applies to the fiat arms race. Unilaterally disarming your credit printer immediately allows a money-printing adversary to outspend and overwhelm you.
It is naive to imagine a scenario where every global actor suddenly decides to cooperate to advance a largely unpopular socioeconomic philosophy that has never succeeded at scale.
π π₯³ Because it's to oldskool and it never worked fair! π« why are we stilll not on a bitcoin standard ?
I'm glad you shared your thoughts
Believe it is not, I had similar
A while ago I was all for capitalism, freedom, minimal government, almost zero taxes, hard money like Bitcoin
But, my thinking process has been, similar to your thoughts, that it is very unlikely to happen that one day, or even gradually, any country or state becomes what I would like it to be
No democracy will vote for less handouts, so that's out
Rarely an authoritarian will agree to reduce his power
Even if it happened, a country with low taxes and inability to print money, will be disadvantaged in how strong army they can stand to defend themselves from invaders
Sadly looks like it's not going to happen
Some say that Bitcoin fixes it because it can be protected from invaders, extremely hard to steal if secured well, ok but all other wealth and infrastructure can still be looted
Some say the culture may change and people start voting for freedom and responsibility and lower taxes and less regulation and less socialism, I doubt it
My current thinking is that it will always be a trade off, balance, tension
And I decided to think less about geopolitics and focus on my own life and things I can influence
Interesting. I had serious misgivings about the most extreme opinions I came across in the early days as well. Then I read a bunch of Austrian economics and got indoctrinated π
At this point I'm finding myself somewhat more in the middle ground. Expecting an overnight revolution still seems incredibly nieve, but gradually building parallel systems which subvert the power of central planners still seems achievable.
There's also a thought in the back of my mind about the speed at which many technologies were adopted in my lifetime and how that could extend to bitcoin as well, but that's obviously theoretical today π
That last point is the most important.
I think about these things primarily because I am writing a book; however, to steel man the libertarian position one might say that everything you mentioned will inevitability lead to governmenal collapse and reformation.
There are many examples of this throughout history, the key might be in being in the right place at the right time.
Youβre missing my point. Gold was a neutral way to exchange value. Thatβs what bitcoin will be for nations.
No, respectfully, you're missing the point.
All the theory in the world doesn't mean a thing in the face of physical reality. The reality we inhabit today is one in which every country on earth is off the gold standard.
Why is that?
I agree
To an extent we can see the mathematical inevitability of the debt crisis one day
And, like it happened many times in history, there will be a change, perhaps a reset, likely hard times, then something new
Good luck with the book
And I'd probably like to read it
Brother Iβm hearing what youβre saying. I get what youβre getting at, Iβm not missing your point.
What Iβm saying is gold WAS the primary trade between nations for a reason. For thousands of years. That means it was working and there was reason to use it. Not just gold, but commodities. Commodities are still used today in trade (exports and imports).
Gold isnβt used today because technology has gotten better at faking gold with lead. Banks and nations still stockpile gold for a reason though!
Under a gold standard governments cannot expand credit or inflate without draining their reserves, so in August 1914 the European powers suspended convertibility in a synchronized move to mobilize for total war. Tax revenue could not fund the fighting, so they turned to inflationary financing instead.
Interesting, I'm not familiar with those names, but I've heard some of the arguments before. The issue I run up against there is the inherent physical requirements of the human interaction with cyberspace.
For instance, I drive a meatsuit which lives in a specific phyaical location. If that location is governed by an authoritarian surveillance monster I am fucked no matter what I do on my computer. The computer manufacturing and internet infrastructure is also in meatspace and can be disrupted by violent actors.
I'll have to check out those names you mentioned though π€
If we enable drastically improved organization & real time coordination between sovereign communities without loss of free will at the crossings, could that effectively improve the odds of a Goliath type adversary seizing the vacuum?
The ability to quickly decide and mobilize through compressed arbitration means small powers can weave themselves into great powers very quickly when the environment and conditions are laid before the storm.
As for sound money, I agree. A little thing people don't consider though is that the grassroots advantage is that sound money is really just sound exchange when you cut away the BS. The more we localize, the more this becomes apparent and you see where money isn't the thing you really needed.
Communities typically cap this free exchange at 250 people unknowingly because of the way our brains work, we just can't really remember how to trust people when it grows beyond that. That's where trusted "credits" can be circulated to map to real time efforts and assets. Time is money after all. There are lessons of this working and failing of course, but technically speaking this is getting much easier to enable in a decentralized way.
Bitcoin tackles a lot of this, but not all of it. People aren't spending it. Their "credits" are worth more than their time. Its great for the future but not functioning in the eye of the storm.
This is where the solutions I see may include other native assets without an issuer being the actual credit exchange mechanism. I'm trying to break things down pragmatically but I meet a lot of emotional resistance with those ideas before we can map the divergences because "bitcoin and everything else" is pretty rooted with blind spots.
There are a number of correct answers to the question I asked, but the ability to counterfeit gold isn't one of them.
In any case, I know we are both hoping for a better world through bitcoin adoption, and that's good enough for me π€
Not to mention in a world full of cybersecurity threats including AI-enhanced hacking and social engineering, a digital bearer instrument with irrevocable settlement faces an enormous challenge in global adoption for both individuals and nation states. I mentioned yesterday that someone I met a while back contacted me for advice on selling all of his bitcoin for gold, and he was somewhat astonished when I said I could never imagine doing that.
There are so many more variables to counter these arguments basically coming down to, under appreciating the scaling in size and speed of various trends. Regardless this is one of the most interesting topics worth thinking about.
What youβre saying is bitcoins adoption and trade of nations is a theory. I agree.
What isnβt a theory is that gold was used for thousands of years: there was a purpose and reason. This is fact.
What obviously is the hope and implication is this can translate to bitcoin.
I agree with much of what you said here and am currently writing a book which is very much along these lines so I appreciate you sharing.
I'm curious what you meant in regards to other assets being the acutual exchange mechanism if you'd care to elaborate.
You're not making any sense. People are dumb enough to work for freely printed money with no backing while it constantly loses value, and prefer it over assets that constantly gain value. You're typing paragraphs trying to get around how obviously they'd be better off not being that retarded.
Have you ever tried to explain what a bitcoin key is to someone who only cares about the USD price of bitcoin?
That's why we're not on a Bitcoin standard.
LSD prices?
What's the book about? I assume it has something to do with bitcoin, but what's your angle?
The story which Austrian economists point to regarding the history of monetary exchange often oversimplifies the role of gold in the market.
The anthropological history of monetary adoption does show weak money being supplanted by hard money, but it doesn't show thousands of years of ubiquitous gold standard across the globe.
Because citizens were retarded enough to work for constantly debased currency when the gold standard existed, so the authorities guessed people would be retarded enough to work for currency that's not backed by anything, and that turned out to be a good guess.
Yes!! and i just stopped explaining that to people who care about the usd price !! It's a Peaceful lifestyle π»σ
σ
€σ
€σ
σ
£σ ͺσ σ σ
σ
σ
σ
£σ
£σ
σ
σ σ
σ
’σ
σ
σ
σ
σ σ
σ
σ
€σ σ ¦σ €σ ©σ
σ
σ €σ ’σ ’σ
σ ¨σ ’σ §σ §σ ‘σ
σ
σ ’σ
σ ¦σ £σ
σ
σ
σ
σ £σ
σ ₯σ
σ ¦σ £σ ¦σ £σ ₯σ
σ §σ
σ σ ₯σ
σ
σ
σ £σ ’σ
σ σ ¦σ €σ ₯σ σ £σ ₯σ ’σ £σ €σ
σ
σ ©σ
σ
σ £σ ¨σ
σ
σ
σ σ
σ
σ
¦
No spoilers yet, but I have a lecture series which might be interesting to you. It's linked on the site in my bio π€
Thabks.
Libertarian principle is not one of self-preservation, itβs one of morality/ non-aggression.
I rather die a hero than live a villain.
β¦admittedly I took this last statement from a recent video by Patrick Smith
A beautiful sentiment, but if libertarians are destined to be a bunch of dead heroes the movement may have some trouble making progress π
Also much more powerful than credit / immediate purchasing power would be a large percentage of people willing to stand up for their rights; no one feeling obligated to allow their victimization⦠imagine a ruling class trying to control such an uncontrollable group
No one is obligated to allow their victimization
View quoted note βAgreed
Yeah, irrevocable cuts both ways. It's exactly what makes it sound money, but one mistake or one good scam and it's gone for good. That's why self custody has to get a lot simpler before normal people really jump in. Respect for not telling your friend to dump it for gold though.
Agreed on the immense challenge of anything gaining global adoption. This moment in time requires local change to root. That local change should be built with interoperability in mind between whatever exchange system the other party uses.
If the strong change makers in each "faction" all cult out about their chains being the only way, we are not going to reach a tipping point of grassroots power in people.
I'm putting my neck out about this, I know, but we are at the stage where internal dynamics in this community divide as much as external dynamics make gaps larger.
If we don't make a pragmatic playground where people can exchange whatever makes sense for them in the moment, without a centralized entity, we are doomed to live inside of the cracked foundation of the current powers of the day I think.
Before talking other assets specifically that might enable what I'm considering, I'm going to use an example from my home town.
We used to have "cool cash" which was a token program to incentivize downtown shopping. The community could buy the bucks at 70cents to the dollar. The businesses could convert for a full dollar at months end. Adoption was rampant during the 90 day annual program at christmas.
It stopped after many years because the cash was too easy to counterfeit in the 90s, forcing them to discontinue the program that compounded.
I'm not saying we all take that approach, I'm saying that you can have a community doing that, a bitcoin community, an indigenous band (or 30), a food credit co-op and the millions of other ways people interact and exchange, that are built on chains, that are all working within a federated node architecture that is interoperable. Effectively all working the same system globally but their own system locally.
If we expect one asset to dominate exchange, we are going to stall. We need more work at the crossings between communities acting of their own free will. The best assets get natural adoption through finality rather than being convinced of utility prior to the practical applications.
This is a hilarious example tbh because it's precisely what the bitcoin standard warns about, just on a micro scale.
A government issues tokens to accellerate economic development. It works, but then the currency collapses due to the ease with which it can be created.
I know people have many varying opinions about it, but I think ecash could easily serve the purpose you're referring to and remain demoninated in bitcoin. The problem comes when an individual has savings in ecash, but not enough to warrant an on-chain transaction.
Yes for sure, the point is that you don't save in the credits (they are effectively worthless on a long enough time scale) and you can immediately bridge them into whatever you want (bitcoin).
This is not meant to be a final system, its meant to be a bridge mechanism that allows natural community adoption in whatever the locals spin up rather than forced mechanism of global agreement (which may be technocratic governance much more quickly than bitcoin standard). It runs parallel as local infrastructure before people are willing to accept bitcoin.
You can't convince people to spend their bitcoin very easily. You can't convince people to buy bitcoin when they're willfully ignorant about it. You can show people a workable system they can engage with that doesn't mean they even have to understand bitcoin or technology.
I'm not even saying it needs to be off bitcoin (I'm trying to talk about tradeoffs and meeting egos), I'm saying we need more decentralized layers to allow other groups to exchange more readily with whatever we spin up.
If we don't have different ways to get into the frame, the masses will flock into regulated technocracy because they can't get their hands around bitcoin practically as an alternative. They don't think macro. They want to outsource their responsibility. We just need them to outsource it locally rather than globally.
Make many micro systems that have gates to interact and exchange between tribes, because tribal is here. The people will figure out that bitcoin is the smartest settlement when they get burned by holding the wrong credits.
There is a lot I don't know on the tech side, I come from grassroots paper and pencil scaling communities, so the tech I'm just trying to map over time.
Right I hear you. I used to worry quite a lot about what the masses would or wouldn't do. Personally I saved myself a lot of stress by letting go of that to focus on what I had control over.
What you're describing sounds quite a lot like federated ecash mints, which are well under development. It's pretty heady stuff, but the UX is improving. We may not have a physical cash solution yet, but it's not impossible.
People are becoming very comfortable paying with their phones now though and the most anonymous way to do that, that I'm aware of, is with ecash.
I'll take a peek at if it fills the gaps I'm finding for the practical applications, thank you!
I passed worrying about the masses 15 years ago and have looped back around to caring about the vulnerable. π
I'm building community tools so people at least have alternatives they can grasp to interact with systems outside their control.
I understand. My empathetic metronome flips back and fourth throughout the day tbh.
I'm glad to hear you're building real systems for real people. I'm mostly trying to put them into words
Putting it into words is necessary. Easier for me to run parallel naming & action (having thrown myself into the community development for a decade with wide eyes) to act accordingly from the inside. And I just need that two sided approach.
Local solutions practically named and piloted in place is what I keep reverting back to, so I've built a kind of digital architecture to practice the methodology at scale.
I'm trying to figure out how to best communicate it and find the right people who can help it travel.
You're most likely in the right place. The No Solutions podcast might be interesting to you. Those people are working on a whole new system
Good point about the first mover disadvantage. But I don't think nations go first, people do. Anyone can hold their own keys long before their government admits anything. And the credit superpower only works while the debt can be rolled over, which gets harder every cycle. So maybe the change comes bottom up, not country by country.
I would love for that to be the case, and it certainly appears that's the track we are on.
Feels that way to me too. Slow and quiet, one person taking their keys at a time. Good luck with the book, I'd like to read it when it's out.
Ecash doesn't tick the scarcity box, so it will always fail to be denominated in bitcoin.
Sounds like yet another Calle scam.
Also agree. Community credit (i.e. local coins/notes) with inter-community exchange mech seem like a viable fix this problem. But, unfortunately, the only project I know of putting any serious work into this is Synonym who want you to "Continue with Google..."
I've got some seriously effective pen to paper stuff and doctrine here. Just trying to finish piecing it together but this piece is my "helping hands" model that effectively decentralizes production within scoped projects and empowers participants in a myriad of ways.
You might consider speaking with Carvallho.
They've lost direction as far as I can see, and would benefit from some product management.
I'll take a look, thank you.
My thought is if I can plug the work into co-ops and northern reserve communities, it might fill some gaps and swing the tools for sovereignty.
Are you in British Columbia by any chance?
I have something in mind in the pemberton valley
I'm in Northwestern Ontario.
XMR is a layer to scope that right now sits in "standby mode". I got a micro bag before it vacated exchanges but then lost it all. π£
At that point it was a PITA anyway, maybe easier now, I guess its been many years of developments.
If there isn't adoption of a decent DID trust layered decentralized interoperable architecture that hardens over time, and the system squeezes us into a central grind with issued coins only, the switch flips for my work. The layers make sense to go physical 4D + XMR until the central versions collapse. Pen to paper protocols.
That's sitting in second state though while I try to make the "active mode" a living reality where we aren't in technocratic hell, but still get the AI wins.
My thought is you can help keep main pieces separate and scoped for privacy but we will see where it all lands when I'm not working in a dark silo. π
Kratter is right. Core is hooped.
XMR is a useful defensive sovereignty pivot while the capture of BTC continues, but in the long term it has structural PQR issues.
I would like to see Luke do MWEB on Blake2b - then game on.
For WoT Ed25519 all the way. Reticulum, meshcore, meshtastic, matrix already use it. Nostr is cooked.
