Bitcoin's fungibility, akin to cash or gold, faces no inherent flaw but reflects external pressures like governmental overreach, not the protocol itself.
In monetary theory, fungibility ensures units are interchangeable, a criterion Bitcoin meets at its core, where one Satoshi equals another.
Its transparent design enables verifiable auditability, reinforcing trust, integrity, and resilience-a feature absent in opaque systems like Monero.
Bitcoin's transparent blockchain ensures auditable integrity, enabling proactive countermeasures against nefarious actions like double-spending or 51% attacks, fostering trust.
Anyone, holders or newcomers can verify transactions or reject invalid blocks, sparking participation like buying Bitcoin or running nodes when threats, like nation-state, corporate, or central bank attacks, become visible, strengthening its self-sustaining security.
Provable unethical actions against Bitcoin raise awareness, inspiring education, adoption, and political advocacy for values like private property and sound money.
This openness turns perceived vulnerabilities into a robust security feature, enabling prompt calls to action that grow resilience.
Ever-growing advancements, tools like CoinJoin, Lightning Network, eCash, and Nostr, enhance practical fungibility by enabling private, uncensorable transactions without sacrificing base layer integrity.
Bitcoin’s open-source, fully transparent nature ensures perpetual advancement, open to all, with unstoppable free markets upholding its integrity.
External interventions, like government restrictions seen with gold bans, cash tracking, or efforts against privacy tools like CoinJoin, do not undermine Bitcoin's intrinsic properties, just as state efforts failed to suppress cryptography.
Its decentralized, unalterable cap and nation-state-resistant design erode centralized control, defunding mechanisms of arbitrary regulation.
This ensures its sound money properties: scarcity, portability, divisibility, fungibility, durability, verifiability, and universal demand sustain unmatched global adoption, outstripping alternatives prone to centralized risks.
Login to reply
Replies (3)
sats may be arguably fungible but LN is a “payment method” on a side chain, or layer 2, that isn’t as reliable as layer 1 and for big amounts is far from efficiency. Although I agree that it is an amazing solution for small amounts
The AI doesn't address the question at all.
The point is that cash and gold are not transacted on an open ledger that anybody can audit with a we browser.
BTC's fungibility may have been a non-issue when it was invented, but as time passes by, technology changes, and it is now a de facto infungible asset because of tainted coins and blacklisted addresses. There's literally credit scores for BTC addresses now.
And I get that advancements like CoinJoin, Lightning, etc. exist to bring BTC's privacy up to speed, but it doesn't mean anything when BTC is still subject to the same concerns that it has on-chain.
View quoted note →