this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
232 points (90.6% liked)
Technology
59017 readers
5117 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Bitcoin was never meant to be legal tender, and it still isn't.
The fact that it's now a regulated commodity is pretty antithetical to its original purpose, but still, it doesn't make it legal tender.
But setting all that aside, you're right, monetary controls are pretty important tools of a nation state... And your alternative is what? A digital gold standard based on Bitcoin....?
That idea is so idiotic, that I can't even start to write out the problems with it, because I wouldn't stop.
The white paper literally says its supposed to he a digital cash, which is legal tender.
And at least one country has already made if officially legal tender lol
It's not digital cash it's digital gold. It doesn't have a predefined value that can be equated against another currency because its availability is limited, It's not currency it's a commodity.
It will become a currency when mining stops, when there is no more bitcoin being made and the value is set against other currencies that's when it becomes a digital currency, assuming that ever happens.
Wrong. Read the white paper.
Your know of course that what's some random crypto bro thinks about his production is not a basis of reality right. ?
Reality is defined by everyone else.
Lol I think the creator of a concept deserves special treatment in what they created. For example, Darwin's ideas weren't about white supremacy, even if social Darwinists used it to justify eugenetics.
I'm not sure I quite follow the logic there. If I hit you over the head and tell you that it's actually a prescribed medical procedure, you are still being hit over the head.