>And if Bitcoin transactions can't outprice >JPEGs in the long run, then it's just not that >valuable.
The demand for *arbitrary* data is gigantically larger than monetary data. Bitcoin the money will never be able to compete with that, and expecting it to do so is just stupid.
Especially if we take the time dependency into account. The monetary use case proves its value in the Long Run (as fiat systems gradually start to fail one by one in the future).
But by the time we reach the point we actually need it, it could well be already dead - because it was just dominated by garbage in the meantime and ppl stop running nodes for this type of junk.
Login to reply
Replies (3)
Money is a $300 trillion market.
If bitcoin monetary transactions don’t outprice JPEGs in the future, it means Bitcoin never took any meaningful marketshare of money. It failed as money in that scenario.
My point is: it would take decades for Bitcoin to reach its (full) monetary potentisl, since fiat currencies fail gradually across the world.
At the same time it would take only a few years of constant spam for Bitcoin to be abandoned by disillusioned node runners.
It could fail wayyy before it even reaches your $300trillion market cap. The gambler's ruin fallacy
Well said. Don't these jpeg fads come and go anyway, whereas monetary transactions have persisted for Bitcoin's full history.