Slashdot Mirror
Twitter CEO Says Bitcoin Will Be the World's 'Single Currency' In 10 Years (theverge.com)
In a recent interview with The Times, Twitter and Square CEO Jack Dorsey said he believes that bitcoin will become the world's single currency within 10 years. "The world ultimately will have a single currency, the internet will have a single currency," said Dorsey. "I personally believe that it will be bitcoin." Dorsey went on to say that the transition would happen "probably over ten years, but it could go faster." The Verge reports: That Dorsey is a fan of bitcoin isn't too surprising, though. In addition to serving as the CEO of Twitter, Dorsey is also the CEO of Square, which recently added the option to buy and sell Bitcoin directly from the Square Cash app. The company also released an illustrated children's story touting the benefits of the digital currency. As for Dorsey himself, he's gone on the record in an interview with The Verge's own Lauren Goode about the benefits of bitcoin as a currency, describing it as the "next big unlock" for the world of finance. (Dorsey owns an unspecified amount of the cryptocurrency.)
I guess no one informed him that bitcoin has a limited number of transactions. Good luck with that.
Obvious pump is obvious
Am I the only one who's starting to get the impression that the people who are running these immense dot-com behemoths might not be as bright as we've been led to believe?
Could it really be that the so-called leaders of the tech sectors are really just a bunch of shallow jackasses with zero self-awareness?
You are welcome on my lawn.
If it happens, it won't be used as a day-to-day currency.....the transaction times are too slow, and the volume is too limited for that. Instead, it will be used the way gold was a century ago......mostly kept track of on ledgers in a bank, used for large transactions between currencies.
The only way that will happen is if there is massive inflation and no one trusts fiat currency anymore. Somehow we made it through the 70s and 80s without that happening, so it seems unlikely.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Bitcoin is an inherently deflationary currency thats been in almost permanent recession since it first got hype. The thing is , what makes a currency good to invest in is somewhat the opposite of what makes a currency good for an economy. When an economy is working, the dollar will buy less and less over time, commensurate with the increase in money flowing in the economy. But bitcoin is hard wired to a very slow increase in money supply and has no financial instruments capable of stimulating that supply of money. This is counter intuitive to a lot of people, but if you look at how real money actually works, you can see its true. In the good times, theres lots of inflation,. both in the price of things, but also in peoples wages. When that trend reverses, we have a depression on our hands(assuming that trend lasts a few quarters, I believe).
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Let me laugh harder!
The same thing could be done with Lightning network without any bitcoin anywhere. No matter how hard you and CEO boy try to shill, bitcoin is not only nearly useless, but also wastes significant electricity.
Enjoy the crash.
But Lightning network fixes that by providing Bitcoin the capability to support extremely high volumes of almost instant and nearly-feeless transactions.
There may be someone who figures out how to make Bitcoin derivatives that enable high volume, low-fee transactions, but it won't be Lighting Networks. They will be in the trashbin of VC funding before the end of next year. Their focus on marketing, combined with their lack of focus on actually getting the thing to work has doomed them: if they ever gain any popularity at all, they will be hacked and lose it all, like many other bitcoin startups before them. Lightning Networks is making all the same security mistakes.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Insults aside, you didn't counter a single thing I said.
1) There is an infinite supply of crypto currency. You didn't dispute this.
2) It has no utility and hence no value. You didn't dispute this either.
3) Blockchain is garbage in garbage out. Again no dispute.
4) I could sell you numbers from my limited pool of numbers with the same pump used for 'crypto' and it would have equal value of zero. Again no dispute.
5) The claimed 'anonymous' nature of Bitcoin transactions is clearly bogus, since all transactions are in the ledger and identifying one traceable transaction identifies them all. No dispute.
Bogus assets are as old as the hills, junk bonds, junk derivatives, subprime mortgage derivatives, all have the property of having value because people selling them claim they have value.
Suckers buy in, then the price drops, the suckers try to talk up the price to minimize their losses, drawing in fewer and fewer suckers until the bubble collapses.
There may be someone who figures out how to make Bitcoin derivatives that enable high volume, low-fee transactions...
And they still wouldn't have fixed the biggest flaw in cryptocurrency: instability. Since around noon today, BTC has gone from a high of $9,174, a low of $8,745, and was at $9,000 when I started writing this, but has since dropped about $8.
The whole concept of a transaction is an exchange of goods or services for an agreed upon sum of currency. Cryptocurrency completely fails at this. Hell, even used iPhones would be a more stable form of currency.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Nonsense argument in the context of inflation. That's like saying that if I sit at home creating new fiat currencies that will inflate existing fiat currencies. Huh? There is an similarly infinite supply of fiat currencies.
Yes you can creat new fiat currencies however typically there are only 1 per country.. However you can create as many alt coins as you want and as with any new software they are built to be better than the last. So what stops users changing from one alt coin to the next? You dont have this option when you are using the local currency. If your in Australia you can only use the australian dollar and that dollar is backed by the government so unless the government goes broke your fiat is perfectly fine.
Many cryptos have utility. Ever heard of smart contracts?
Yes smart contracts are a good utility, howeve there is no lock in unless one crypto becomes the default way to do contracts. What stops me changing to a new smart contract provider? The issue is it is too easy to create another coin/smart contract/blockchain thing. The only defining asset a crypto has is the amount of people using it.
How is "garbage in garbage out" a problem? (that's a typical trait of most systems)
Agree, garbage in garbage not a problem if you are using a coin that has a decent following. If its full of garbage no one would be using it.
No you can't .... well not in the same way cryptos can. The blockchain provides a layer of trust and mechanisms for transactions (that maintain this trust relationship). The fact it uses "numbers" is an implementation detail.
Again you could make the same argument for fiat currency (a piece of paper with a number on it, heck I'll print you some now!).
The parent was saying that he could create a new alt coin and sell coins in it for bugger all capital investment. A lot harder to create a fiat currency and sell it. Yes it is next to impossible to forge a bitcoin and very hard and illegal to forge fiat.
You've changed from discussing "crypto currencies" to now being specific about BTC.
There are many 'anonymous' cryptos if you're wanting one. BTC is not one.
Agree.
Fiat currencies are a flat out failure and will collapse at some point. Something will replace them, it may be crypto currency, it may not.
Ask yourself: Why does a currency need an underlying asset of value? (yes it's a common trait, but not a required one). What is the underlying asset behind fiat currencies? There's not a whole lot of difference between either except one was here first and the other provides a bunch of additional features (think inflation).
Fiats are not a failure, there is a reason for fiat, yes governments can and do abuse it by printing billions which can turn into inflation (or even worse: hyperinflation) . On the other hand having it locked to a physical asset like gold can cause the money supply to dry up which is another set of problems. see Why the Gold Standard Is the World's Worst Economic Idea, in 2 Charts I think having any blockchain as currency and its limited nature is like having a gold standard, which means your screwed in recessions. So I dont think any government is going to allow cryptos as a standard medium of exchange unless they are allowed to increase its supply ( Then cryptos are basically fiat. )
Not at all. It all makes far more sense when you look at the money:
Man who somehow made a whole lot of money by starting a company that has been unable to make any money is suggesting that something that isn't money will become worldwide money.
When you frame it like that you realise that he doesn't have dementia, he just has no idea where money comes from or how it works.
You've got the wrong end of the stick if you're asking "How will this benefit Twitter?" The question should be "How will the benefit Jack Dorsey?"
The answer is right there in the summary: he's also the CEO of a credit card processing company that's just gotten into BitCoin. So the title of this article should be "Square CEO says bitcoin will be the world's only currency in ten years," and the summary should note that people believing this would be very good for Square.
I wouldn't be surprised if Dorsey picked up a bunch of Bitcoin before making the pronouncement. However if I were a Twitter stockholder I wouldn't be too happy about his using his Twitter notoriety this way.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
It is surely reasonable to think that if Bitcoin were used as the main (or only) currency, its value would be stable (as things are priced in Bitcoin).
And there's your problem. Nations (especially the US) are NOT going to give up their own currencies, because the loss of control over their economies. Yes, the Euro is different, and there are conditions to be able to issue it - "budget deficit of less than 3% of their GDP, a debt ratio of less than 60% of GDP (both of which were ultimately widely flouted after introduction), low inflation, and interest rates close to the EU average"