Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fiat vs. Bitcoin

fiatfate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 77 posts

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#21

Post by lucozade »

jpatokal wrote: post #20
ForHackernews wrote: post #18

By any reasonable definition, Bitcoin is a fiat currency. Unlike commodities like gold or silver, it has no inherent value whatsoever, and no applications for industrial use or jewellery. Bitcoin is a fiat currency because it only has value while some group of humans collectively agree to pretend that is has value. The same as dollars or yen.

The key difference, though, is that fiat currency is easily debased because whoever controls it can print more, while Bitcoin does not have a single owner and can only change if the majority of miners agree to do so.

More specifically, the majority of individuals who control mining.

I’d be interested to know how many people would actually need to agree a fork that, say, didn’t halve the coinbase.

Also, of those, how many would give priority to the philosophical underpinnings of Bitcoin over making more money in the short/medium term.

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#22

Post by zeroxfe »

ForHackernews wrote: post #18

By any reasonable definition, Bitcoin is a fiat currency. Unlike commodities like gold or silver, it has no inherent value whatsoever, and no applications for industrial use or jewellery. Bitcoin is a fiat currency because it only has value while some group of humans collectively agree to pretend that is has value. The same as dollars or yen.

> By any reasonable definition, Bitcoin is a fiat currency.

Sure, if you entirely change the definition of fiat currency.

A fiat currency gets its value by being declared by government as legal tender, and then required by law to be accepted in a jurisdiction.

Bitcoin might share the "no intrinsic value" property of fiat, but that does not make it fiat. It's pretty much the opposite of fiat in every other respect.

Even for gold, the majority of its market value is not from industrial use -- it's from speculation driven by scarcity (pretty much exactly like Bitcoin.) This applies to gold jewelry too -- the scarcity of gold gives it its market value.

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#23

Post by tim333 »

candiodari wrote: post #2

Interesting graph. Of course it's saying a lot more about fiat currency than about bitcoin. The graph would look about the same with almost any commodity, stock, real estate, ... and so on and so forth. It would look the same (exponential shape) for any state, and crucially, it would look the same even if you went back centuries or even millenia. The only real conclusion to draw from this is that governments have alw…

It's more than spending more than they claim to spend. Governments could arrange for the value of their fiat currency to be stable or go up a bit but people borrow lots of it to buy houses and if the value goes up they have a job paying and the economy tanks. It's much easier to print some more and let it depreciate a bit.

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#24

Post by 6nf »

caramelsuit wrote: post #6

Now if only you could by bread with bitcoin.

You could I guess but it's really better to just use a credit card. Your CC company rewards you for using it while a Bitcoin transaction is the opposite - it costs you money to spend BTC. If you want anonymity, use cash. If not, use a credit card.

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#25

Post by evgen »

Sir_Substance wrote: post #17
nicky0 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then you are not really paying with Bitcoin. You are paying with Visa and funding your account with Bitcoin.

By that standard, when you use a bog standard Visa card you're not actually paying with dollars[1], you're paying with the artificial virtual currency your bank provides that is pegged to the dollar at 1:1, and merely funding your account with dollars. [1] Substitute your local fiat currency here

No, you are paying with whatever currency the counter-party accepts. What backs the debit/credit card does not matter as long as the issuer thinks you have the assets to cover the loan they are making. If I have a card linked by my brokerage account I am not paying for dinner with shares of AMZN, I am paying in dollars and at some point will be required to convert some asset into dollars to cover the loan.

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#26

Post by [deleted] »

zeroxfe wrote: post #22
ForHackernews wrote: post #18

By any reasonable definition, Bitcoin is a fiat currency. Unlike commodities like gold or silver, it has no inherent value whatsoever, and no applications for industrial use or jewellery. Bitcoin is a fiat currency because it only has value while some group of humans collectively agree to pretend that is has value. The same as dollars or yen.

> By any reasonable definition, Bitcoin is a fiat currency. Sure, if you entirely change the definition of fiat currency. A fiat currency gets its value by being declared by government as legal tender, and then required by law to be accepted in a jurisdiction. Bitcoin might share the "no intrinsic value" property of fiat, but that does not make it fiat. It's pretty much the opposite of fiat in every other respect. Ev…

[deleted]

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#27

Post by [deleted] »

zeroxfe wrote: post #22
ForHackernews wrote: post #18

By any reasonable definition, Bitcoin is a fiat currency. Unlike commodities like gold or silver, it has no inherent value whatsoever, and no applications for industrial use or jewellery. Bitcoin is a fiat currency because it only has value while some group of humans collectively agree to pretend that is has value. The same as dollars or yen.

> By any reasonable definition, Bitcoin is a fiat currency. Sure, if you entirely change the definition of fiat currency. A fiat currency gets its value by being declared by government as legal tender, and then required by law to be accepted in a jurisdiction. Bitcoin might share the "no intrinsic value" property of fiat, but that does not make it fiat. It's pretty much the opposite of fiat in every other respect. Ev…

[deleted]

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#29

Post by mbrock »

jondubois wrote: post #13

I think that currency volatility won't be a problem in the future. Everything will be online and prices of items will update in real time to reflect supply and demand relative to any digital currency of your choice. It will be like in the old days when people used to haggle over the price of everything.

I guess you would also haggle continuously over your per-second wage?

Re: Fiat vs. Bitcoin

#30

Post by ramontayag »

lucozade wrote: post #21
jpatokal wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key difference, though, is that fiat currency is easily debased because whoever controls it can print more, while Bitcoin does not have a single owner and can only change if the majority of miners agree to do so.

More specifically, the majority of individuals who control mining. I’d be interested to know how many people would actually need to agree a fork that, say, didn’t halve the coinbase. Also, of those, how many would give priority to the philosophical underpinnings of Bitcoin over making more money in the short/medium term.

Even if miners could change the rules and print more, do you think the users would continue to use it?
Post reply on HN