Reddit Posts
Mollars ($MOLLARS) ICO | Store of Value ERC-20 | SOV Token for Ethereum Blockchain | Avoid Scams Utilizing The Mollars Name
Hard capped coins vs uncapped coins.
Bitcoin is an inflation hedge and a store of value? What you think it means VS What it really means
in YOUR opinion is Bitcoin...top 5? 10? 15?..... ultimately I see it's a SOV with P2P properties and how about ETH? Can you imagine a list without these at number 1 and 2?
Algorand: Bit of a Deep Dive
I see this as generation Zoomer's chance to buy Bitcoin in 2010. 99.99% of you wouldnt then and wont now. Read on.
Why hasn’t the SOV narrative of BTC played out?
Battle LEET- An upcoming blockchain game from GMR!
Salvadorians can borrow from themselves at 0% interest.
How are we supposed to use BTC as a medium of exchange when every transaction is a taxable event?
Mentions
I find your question quite vague. If by scalability you mean can the bitcoin network scale to support high-volume c2c and b2c payments, I don't believe technology is a barrier. For me the key barriers are political, financial and implementation. And there are many actors in this space, all with vested interests. Together the barriers and actors make this is a multi-faceted complex situation. As a result I believe bitcoin is well on the way to establishing itself as a store of value and it may not do more. The SOV market is completely different to the payments market and the barriers to entry are too.
If you know what to use, it can. Bitcoin changed my life simply because I understand that it will be monetized over decades and if you live in a modernized country and have a stream of excess income you can not only outperform the market, you can simply shatter it, consistently. And anyone who has understood this has done just that. I'm actually very grateful I am not someone who lives in a place where they *must* use Bitcoin all the time. Places in Africa use Bitcoin simply because they are unbanked. US will be one of the last countries to use Bitcoin in everyday life. Monetization takes a very long time. It will need to be accepted as a SOV until almost everyone holds some. At that point we will start to see MOE and shortly after that the money becomes the UOA. Just like all money, store of value is the most important part because that is what creates network effect.
Real estate was never a great SOV because of property taxes, upkeep, and other related expenses. There are some exceptions like when the land is abundant in natural resources. It wasn’t until Fiat currency that the insane returns for all real estate started being consistent enough for a SOV. Fiat currency strips away every other method to preserve wealth, especially when gold is outlawed or confiscated from the people. All this makes real estate the new best investment. If an asset that has better monetary properties comes along that can’t be confiscated, centralized or controlled like gold, then real estate stops being the best storage. Especially when the government is becoming increasingly controlling. They can take property at any time as they have in the past. I agree it’s not simple, but literally every factor points to bitcoin siphoning wealth from every other “store of value” that fiat currency has propped up heavily for the past 50-100 years.
You say that but its all relative, as it takes value from other assets, those assets would decrease in value creating buying opportunities for those assets instead in short-medium length time frames. For example... A lot of boomers will die and a lot of BTC millennials will inherit a lot of gold. There will be a generational shift in wealth between these two assets. However... If BTC is at the top of a bull market cycle and gold is plummeting. I'm gonna be buying gold until there is some capitulation in the BTC market because the likelihood is one will be over-sold vs over-bought in comparison to the other. Its not quite as simple as you make it out to be. Also BTC has no production value, unless you class the energy farms that run the network as a backup to grid stability a production value but these farms would always rather be mining than selling to the grid. Humans need houses and commercial buildings for work... they need food and clean water etc... BTC doesn't contribute to any of this as such it will struggle to steal wealth from these assets a lot of which are also considered "SOV" assets because its a forgone conclusion that they'll continue to exist because they literally have to for us to survive and as such are invested in as SOV's as well as production assets. The only area I really foresee BTC stealing a % of wealth from is Gold but it will find an equilibrium with that too. Gold also has production value. Its used in Jewellery and electronics. It provides value in other ways than just a "SOV". This is actually and area where BTC is weak. I don't think any asset really exists now purely as a SOV other than BTC. BTC is however the most secure SOV and best in that arena which is whats giving it value however I don't think it will "steal" from the wealth pie as much as you think it will. It will probably carve out its own section of the pie through inflation with new money heavily entering that space however Its ability to "steal value" is overestimated. Look how well gold is doing in the last couple years despite BTC rapid adoption.
Not me-my whole thesis on BTC is that because it’s a superior store of value asset, it has asymmetric upside because it will steal market cap from gold, real estate, bonds and other assets used to store value. I weathered the storm through crypto winter a couple years back, and have some tolerance for longer periods of under performance. Not 5-10 years though. I believe as Saylor does-either it’s going to zero or it’s going to 1M plus per BTC. If it gets adoption as a store of value asset and steals market cap from other SOV asset classes, it must continue to rise in price. If it stalled or backed up and got stuck in sideways or lower action for years, I would pull out and get real estate. Its definitely has value as an always on, censorship resistant transfer mechanism, and always tradeable asset, but the price has to go up to feed the returns that keep attracting new institutional store of value capital…indicating it’s on a path to that asymmetric upside.
Ser, I've seen people tell us how bitcoin can do and be everything for years, before settling in on SOV. No sense trying to have it compete with utility. Two different markets.
Who would’ve thought the hodl, SOV, digital gold etc narrative would result in centralization at the top of the economy. There were people who warned about leaving the MOE, Digital Cash system. www.hijackingbitcoin.com r/leopardsatemyface
As an aside, people assume any quantum post is a narrative or fud. I look at it differently. We clearly have the SOV coin decided as BTC. Keeping that value strong *helps* the utility space. So, you can see upside for the utility space AND still want the SOV space to remain strong.
SOV until adoption curve flattens and volatility fades, then MOE
On what objective? In 2013 it was a medium of exchange where 10 millions bitcoins change hands change hands. We aren’t close to it, and we do need another success for Bitcoin other than SOV which we all agree on achieving that.
Yeah but if it all it has then it will be doomed like gold. You know the FED was worried about when it was a medium of exchange. I don’t see rn , afraid also, that bitcoin or LN won’t be medium of exchange ever. Because if it stays just a SOV it future may be like gold and that’s it - not that’s a bad but is it gives hope ?
I'm going to throw an alt out there that really has not gained traction yet. Mollars token. I will preface this by saying this one is high risk, high reward, even for the crypto markets. I'm going to share some reasoning as to why I think it could be a gem. The token itself is designed as a store of value with a max supply of 10 million and 1,737,068 already burned. Along with being an SOV, the founders are/have developing a crosschain DEX and their own router, which will utilize the mollars token, giving it more utility beyond being a SOV. According to the team, everything will be finished and released by January 20th, 2025 with aggressive marketing to follow. Now, obviously, DYOR on this one. It could go to the moon or it could fail miserably, only time will tell. It's priced .07 - .08 right now so it might be worth throwing a few bucks at. FYI, the dex is actually live just without its own router for the moment.
“They don’t need no…” 🤣 Are you serious? You think they’ll be top dogs forever?? If they don’t pivot…if they don’t adapt they will be just as relevant as the instant camera or the portable calculator. Fiat is being rapidly devalued…they need to find a better SOV than fiat.
Bitcoin fan here as well! I often hear Bitcoin being a SOV but does it fit that definition? Investment by definition seems more like it, especially if compared to S&P. That being said, I think the use case is still within discovery because as of now, it will vary based on where you live in the world.
Don't get me wrong. I agree bitcoin its awesome, a paradigm swift. But it cannot be money, just SOV. It's intrinsically volatile due to its fixed supply so its not money nor can it be
It ok you are just number 100k who asks this question. Bitcion is a saving account SOV (and just happens to be the best money we have). So what would you say to a person asking you "is it still worth to start saving ?) ? The issue is Bitcoin is relative new so not everybody agrees, and to be honest to come to full blossom we need way more people to agree. Even being the best money is not a guarantee it will also be adopted by everyone, after all it is decentralized, thus it is hard to make anyone unable to use it, but also free for everyone not to use it. But exactly these facts make it this volatile and potential further adoption make way higher valuation possible while there is also the risk it won't make it.
Positive correlation between alts & BTC? Where have you been these last years? Alts the same sector as BTC? Are they all a SOV?
I completely understand your point that there is no express, official link between Bitcoin and the dollar. My point is that there is a practical link, and likely will be for a long time. The notion that the two will decouple in the future seems highly speculative, at least for the foreseeable future. So, in my mind, for the time being at least, Bitcoin is susceptible to the same inflation risks inherent in the dollar and it is not a good SOV because it is volatile. If I understand you correctly, you believe these current challenges to Bitcoin are expected to mitigate in the future as BC becomes more mainstream and more widely understood.
Unit of account is one of the last steps a new form of money can/ has to go through. So while some already do I (nobody) knows when a majority of people will do. Your decouple, hedge against inflation, volatility, SOV, question/statements are all related to understanding what money is, what fiat is and than some more, and I can't explain all of that in a few posts.
Don't do it. The market doesn't need or want this. You can't create a SOV out of scarcity alone. What makes a SOV is security & in this metric you will not be able to compete with BTC.
Seems like a lot of people share this sentiment in this thread. It's sorta (not exactly, I don't like throwing the word scam around) what led our team to make stability blockchain - a public chain with no native token. We aren't trying to sell you any token. Anyone can use the chain completely for free, with just an email, forever, if all they need is like 1000 txs a month. Any more than that, and we ask you to sign up for a plan. Fixed price, with a contract, cancel anytime. If you have any issues, your plan comes with customer support - talk directly to our devs To all the people who became more Bitcoin maxi - love that. That's for currency and SOV. I'm talking about pure blockchain utility, nothing to do with monetary policy. Anyway, that's my rant lol
Agreed. BTC is great and all but it is really more suited to be SOV than a means of exchange or even a unit of account. BTC is truly digital gold and much scarcer than the yellow metal.
There were alternative smart contract platforms since 2016 but long term Ethereum prevailed Also, there are p2p alts that could compete with BTC but BTC went more into SOV direction where it has no real competition
BTC is an SOV. That's it. It can't do anything else. The devs tried to make it more interesting but failed. It remained a one-trick pony beloved by rich assholes like Saylor.
Can someone link me to any prominent figures that attempt to dispute Saylor’s claims about how BTC is going to take a significant share of that 450tril SOV capital?
Idk what everyone's talking about here but RSK already has the SOV zero interest loans product... its decentralized algorithmic collateralized lending.. idk what else you want
The Bitcoin network cannot be stopped; it will function as long as there are people running Bitcoin client software. What will happen with the price in the short term is uncertain, but one thing is clear: in the short term, there may be volatility, large manipulations, etc., but in the long term, Bitcoin's value will only increase. You need to understand the concept of hard money. Hard money always wins. Why is that? It's simple everyone wants hard money, no one wants to lose. Everyone wants money whose purchasing power increases, and no one wants money whose purchasing power decreases, like fiat currencies. Money has three uses: Store of Value (SOV), Medium of Exchange (MOE), and Unit of Account (UOA). Every form of money must first be something valuable that people collect as a Store of Value, and then it becomes a Medium of Exchange and a Unit of Account. Therefore, Bitcoin will become a universally accepted medium of exchange. You won't have to sell Bitcoin at the end of the game; you'll be able to spend it, because, in the end, all merchants will accept Bitcoin.
Eventually is very broad term! If you think USA would allow their dollar to devalue and stop their money printer for something they can’t control, then your macro understanding of the market is flawed. When you say everything will be priced in BTC! You think SPX will be measured against BTC? Bitcoin will never be a standard because it has no stability in price! People will not be using BTC for multiple purchases in the midst of a volatility session and keep calculating how much SAT needs to be transferred at that given point of time. Sure will have infrastructure that could support it in the long term, great as a SOV, but hoping for other currencies to fail and devalue will never happen in the foreseeable future. That’s for sure!
Hyperbitcoinization is inevitable. Money is a social consensus that we use to facilitate the trade of goods and services. Throughout history, money has taken many forms, but it consistently serves three functions: SOV (Store of Value), UOA (Unit of Account), and MOE (Medium of Exchange). Bitcoin has already crossed the Rubicon, and there are enough people around the world who already use it as money, primarily as an SOV. It's also important to understand that every form of money in monetary history first evolves as an SOV, and then it becomes an MOE and UOA. Hard money always wins; no one wants to lose, and everyone wants to use hard money. Therefore, the number of people using Bitcoin as money, specifically as an SOV, will continue to grow, and eventually, Bitcoin will become both a UOA and MOE. So, you won't need to sell Bitcoin for millions—Bitcoin will become universally accepted as an MOE and UOA.
Peter doesn’t understand money at all. Is he doing it on purpose? I see he owns a gold trading company, or is it truly a lack of knowledge about money? I'm not sure. Money is a social system we use to facilitate the trade of goods and services. Throughout history, money has taken many forms, but it consistently serves three functions: SOV (Store of Value), UOA (Unit of Account), and MOE (Medium of Exchange). People still use gold as money today in the SOV role, even though, due to its poor characteristics as money, gold has lost its function as an MOE and UOA. Because of gold's weaknesses as money, banks emerged, and so did today's fiat system. Jack is absolutely right: Bitcoin has better characteristics as money than gold and can play the role of money more effectively. Who will be the long-term winner between gold and Bitcoin? Harder money always wins. Gold, with 2% inflation, will increase its supply over 50 years, while Bitcoin will never exceed 21 million.
You have to have a money that people chose before you have a medium of exchange You actually can’t have one without the other. Adoption comes far before stability essentially SOV then MOE then UOA
Eth is not every other crypto, like it or not. You can default to other chains the potential solution, it still remains an issue. SOV utility alone doesn’t generate enough fees to keep the supply caped
SOV > MOE > UOA That's how it happens
>Bitcoin will become widely accepted as a medium of exchange; you won’t need fiat money. You hope. Btc isn't past SOV phase yet. It's getting there with more and more places. But just bc more and more places accepts it doesn't mean much if no one is using it. But in order to use it it has to go onto a platform and hot wallet that's tied to you. The whole lure of BTC was it's anonymity. That's fading fast.
Bitcoin is money, and the functions of money are a store of value, a unit of account, and a medium of exchange. Every form of money starts as a store of value (SOV), meaning it is valuable as a collectible, and then it becomes a medium of exchange (MOE) and a unit of account (UA). Bitcoin will become widely accepted as a medium of exchange; you won’t need fiat money. Even today, you can use Bitcoin as a medium of exchange to pay for various goods and services. In some countries, like El Salvador, it has even been declared legal [tender.You](http://tender.You) can pay with Bitcoin at all places, even at McDonald's. Here, you have a video on YouTube showing what buying a burger at McDonald's in El Salvador looks like. [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/25\_VkeiT4R0](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/25_VkeiT4R0)
A great return to crypto's highest purpose as a SOV and currency is nigh. PoW FTW.
SOV first, then MOE, then UOA Could happen faster than most think. Who had 2 presidential candidates shilling at the Bitcoin conference on their bingo cards from 2020? Not me.
Seems like you have more to study about monetization. You'll understand the stages Bitcoin is going to go through much better afterwards. No one in modern countries are going to race out and spend the hardest money humans have ever created during early adoption. You really want to buy a pizza that will be worth $20M one day? Most of us don't. We want to stack. Right now, the unbanked 3rd world are who *need* to use it as MOE. The fortunate will use it as a SOV until monetization stabilizes and it makes more sense as a MOE for people brainwashed into the fiat system.
Per the article (and actually working with the tokens involved), the price may fluctuate, but the return of 1 Spot for 1 Ampl, regardless of the price of either is pretty genius. And since the tokens track inflation, it serves as a store of value (SOV) better than anything else long term. Couple that with no liquidation markets that create a cascading effect on markets, and it's what Defi has needed to move us away from fiat.
>Because gold has demand for things other than being a store of value Bitcoin offers other things than being a store of value. Being a "fuck you money" is one of them. Some nobody in China can take their wealth with them when emigrating to the west is one of many examples. >so even if it is heavily centralized, there is still an external demand for it that sustains its value. What exactly will make gold to sustain its value? Being used in electronics? Because jewelry it ain't. Once gold loses its SOV, people won't be interested in paying the same price for a yellow metal as before. Gold is uses as jewelry because it is SOV. So please, give me a "big one" for gold.
I agree it is a great modern store of value, as someone who has invested in BTC for yrs but I keep seeing all these people talk about BTC like it will replace the US Dollar for instance. People don't view BTC as a currency, they see it as a SOV. I'm just curious how others see it.
BTC. LTC. ETH. These will ALWAYS be the big 3. bitcoin is for SOV , litecoin is actually what bitcoin aspired to be. (Payments). ETH will be used for applications but has long way to go and many rivals…
Medium of exchange comes after store of value in the evolution of a new currency. Stores will not accept BTC until it’s already achieved massive liquidity. That happens via more and more people using it as a SOV.
Not a debate, just a literal definition. Currency is legal. Money is any MOE, UOA and SOV.
I don't need to reference wiki so I can make a comment on Reddit. I've read many books on money over the years as a Bitcoin holder. All 3 Saifedean books, Lyn Alden's Broken Money, History of Money, Psychology of Money etc. I recommend Broken Money. In your "socio-economic" sense, many things have been used as money. The very first money ever discovered was literally just a ledger carved into stone. Furs, salt, shells, beads, and even boulders were all a MOE, UOA and a SOV. You last paragraph is completely false. If it were true, then literally every other asset that you can measure in dollars would have gained proportional value to Bitcoin, which we all know hasn't happened. Just because you personally choose not to measure things in Bitcoin, doesn't make it any less of a unit of measure. People use it more as a UOA every day to give perception to the asymmetrical increase in its buying power vs other assets or savings vehicles.
Bitcoin is not a currency. It was turned into a digital SOV digital gold.
No you can't, BTC is an SOV like gold which has a value different than cash. It's not replicable, as the origin story and history of decentralization is not repeatable. Comparing eth to it unitonically is usually only done by early and large eth investors and they're clowns.
There's BTC which has obvious global utility as an SOV and then there's everything else. Of the everything else, you have a handful of financial innovations with inherent value. The rest are pvp casino games where you try to extract value from others ( think of them as the house collectively but it includes the coin team, early investors and retail) and usually fail in the long run.
Nono, I’m a hodler myself. SOV is a perfect usecase for me (I use it as a savings account). But I don’t spend my bitcoin.
It’s a matter of pricing perspective. Folks can price BTC in $, €, £, ¥, ETH, DOGE, SHIB, 🐄, 🌾, 🦆, whatever. It doesn’t matter. The distinction is - BTC is a store of value (SOV) as a commodity considered property. Very few other financial instruments are a SOV. Gold is the next best example. There are significantly different investment characteristics between BTC, Gold and $ if we narrow it to 3 well known instruments / assets. Over the long haul, to-date nearly everything priced in BTC is headed to zero at different rates, until proven otherwise (perhaps several halvings / epochs from now). There are arbitrage opportunities between a lot of different instruments / assets. That’s the basis for trade of instruments in the Forex market. Don’t get me wrong, there are opportunities to make more $s or 🦆s if that’s what someone is after, in light of BTC volatility. Or folks can avoid trading in and out because, with successive epochs, nearly everything else will continue going to zero given a long enough time horizon. NFA. DYOR.
It is amazing how many people think a store of value is precluded from being volatile. I'll take violent upward trajectory over steady decline every day in my SOV. My currency on the other hand is a different story.
This is what I suggest you think about. There are a large number of currencies around the world that move up and down against each other, there are alternative ways to store your value - houses, gold, silver, diamonds, stocks, bonds, real estate, oil and many more. Some are better than others. The USD sits amongst all of these and everything is connected. Worldwide everyone has a choice of where to store their hard-earnt value, that choice changes as the relative performance of each SOV changes. And it's not just about storing your value, it also about debt. Any debt priced in USD will be reduced, annoying debtees. There's a lot of inter-country debt priced in USD. With such financial complexity flying around is it no wonder that BlackRock states that bitcoin is a flight to safety.
Bitcoin is being treated as more of an SOV and investment vehicle rather than its primary purpose of subverting centralised control.
The dude has talked shit about bitcoin for years now. When we 'crash' to 150k years from, he'll be like, "I told you it was too volatile and not a SOV!!"
This guy is the epitome of if I talk louder than you my argument will win, even when he's hit with reality and factual information. Does this guy even buy what he is saying or is he just that bitter that he bet on the wrong SOV? Natalie on the other hand was cool, calm, and collected. Which means she is confident in the mechanics of Bitcoin as a whole and sees the bigger picture that gold will be outdated, and fiat is a failure and in free fall. It even seems like Charles was offended by Peter's absurdity at times.
Wow, just realized Bitcoin replacing real estate as SOV means housing prices become more affordable for people...
I think the “endgame” for most maximalists would be that bitcoin becomes a new unit of measure for the global asset supply. So instead of measuring the value of as you say the gold supply as 15T fiat dollars, it could also be denominated as X bitcoins. Right now, since we are early in the adoption process, the value in bitcoin for many is in its potential appreciation, which in a sense is a hindrance to its actual purpose as a better currency as no one wants to sell it and miss out on future gains. However, once adoption is saturated “price” will plateau, and people will better understand its use as a superior SOV/medium of exchange/unit of measure. And when this happens the concept of the “price” of bitcoin will sound as silly as the “price” of $100, because we will now not be thinking of bitcoin in terms of how many $ for 1 BTC, but what is the value of say a car or a house in satoshis.
The main use of BTC is store of value. Which right now is held in gold ($15T), fine art(5T), real estate($300T) , bonds...to name a few. The overall market of SOV is around 350T. So the real question, in my mind, is how much market share will BTC take in SOV? The biggest market of SOV is real estate at $300T. So, lets just focus there. We know people need to live in homes to survive, that market will always exist. The next question is, how many wealthy people are storing their money in real estate... the answer is A LOT!! Im not talking about their primary family homes and a couple of vacation homes. We're talking houses and condo's they rarely visit, because that isnt why they bought them (which is one of the causes for our inflated real estate markets) . Would you (as a wealthy investor) rather put your money into a house that has to be maintained with gardeners, pay property tax, take the risk of 'acts of god' destroying your investment ... and then, when you decide you want to sell, you have to find and agent to take pics, put it on the market, show the property, which could take a minimum of 60 days to liquidate (being generous)? Or would you rather have a digital asset that you can travel the world with and when/if you wish to liquidate you can do so anywhere with an internet connection instantaneously? Of course ive heavily over simplifying for sake of conversation here. But, to answer you question, IMO, I feel its safe to say BTC should grab about 1/3 of the SOV market which puts it roughly at a $100T asset. Brining the total price per coin to around $7 Million and change.
Bitcoin is an SOV, a collectable like watches, art, and stamps.. etc. They might not have a necessity or real underlying value, but they are great store of value. Remember that diamonds have no underlying value but have high market value.
DOGE not nearly as good of a SOV bechae it doesn't undergo halvings and is infinitely inflationary
Much less hassle than houses. Not as complicated as stocks and bonds. The value of Bitcoin as a SOV is so high, I couldn't care less whether it becomes a currency.
Beanie Babies! Tulips! : Show me Beanie/Tulip ETFs ETF’s only care about fees! : Is that why Black Rock filed to allocate it under one of their funds? Waste of Energy! You mean like social media, pornography, video games, & non-educational television? You can’t all cash out at the same time! : You mean like literally EVERY market? What happens if everyone decides to sell a stock at the same time? No use case! : Use case like SOV which many are currently doing? Bad for the environment! : You mean like all the EV batteries that we can’t recycle yet so we pollute the works until further notice? Criminal activities! : You mean like FIAT which has been THE currency for 99% of all criminal activity? EVER. Too slow! : You mean like wire transfers? We got credit cards for speed and security. CULT like following! : You mean like followers of sports teams, stocks, companies, brands, political ideals, (insert anything here. ANYTHING can have some cult-like participants)
>From an economic point of view it is a great store of value. Do people care about that definition of SOV though? Usually, people concerned about SOV are interested in wealth preservation, which Bitcoin is not good for. Its highly volatile.
They don't have to be dicks about it And it's not like they're exclusively saying alts are shitcoins cause they underperformed BTC long term They claim that BTC as a p2p/SOV is the only use case in crypto They totally ignore what ethereum has achieved technology and adoption wise by repeating the that ETH had ICO which must mean it's a security and the DAO hack/fork which must mean it's centralised The fact that you can use ethereum in countless more ways than bitcoin gets totally ignored
yeah you could probably get a shop to accept gold pieces too. but in the end there are easier ways to do small transactions. btc has kinda evolved to be a long term SOV inflation hedge.
Who cares about layers 2? The main use case of BTC today is SOV, years of labor stored securely, in digital property with a limited supply. If once a month I need to convert a bit of BTC back to fiat to pay my expenses, so be it.
But bch will do it all just as good or better than each respectively. Virtually free tx Fully capable defi with cashtokens. Albeit it’s so new it needs to be built up still. But that is working. Virtually for free as opposed to ETH There are quality mixers to achieve adequate privacy that just need to be developed to the point they auto run in the back of all wallets. The only reason it isn’t a SOV yet is because it it was ever allowed to be it would eclipse everything.
Considering its exellent SOV properties, exchanging it across borders is cheaper and faster than sending gold or a building in Manhatton that's for sure.
I love this: " It doesn't have to be a currency. Nobody's trying to buy a cup of coffee with a fraction of their building on 5th avenue." People say Bitcoin failed as a currency. I personally only care to use it as a SOV. I have credit cards for my everyday transactions. Spend FIAT. Save in BTC.
You take out a 1M ZUSD loan Immediate step: Convert into DLLR, the main stablecoin used for DeFi applications across Sovryn ecosystem With this, you currently can: 1. Convert into USDT or USDC through Babelfish aggegator, then transfer and cash out through the many options that exist throughout the cryptoworld, eg through Coinbase. Fund your lifestyle pay bills, etc. 2. Lend to earn interest on [Sovryn](https://sovryn.app/earn/lend) (interest paid out stablecoin) 3. Trade for more assets - like buying BTC or the protocol's governance token, SOV. 4. Provide liquidity for trading pools When do you pay back? Whenever you want. Or never. You're lending against yourself. No one is coming to ask you questions. But remember to watch your collateral ratio. If it fall before 110%, automatic liquidation begins. Add/remove collateral as needed. No other charge throughout the life of the loan. 8% Origination fee: Charged immediately the loan is issued, and distributed to stakers in the protocol as per their voting weight. (SOV stakers controlling the Bitocracy) As always, Disclaimer: Not Financial advice. You still need to DYOR.
All of that is horseshit except for maybe SOV and Bonds.
Seems ironic that you got so excited by the price movement that you forgot BTC is an SOV now, not a medium of exchange.
Ehh i just looked too. I just call people out who give their opinion as fact with no evidence. Like saying gold is a SOV when a small bit of fact checking will show the complete opposite.
BitcoinOS from the creators of SOV over on rootstock
Maybe externally, inside the community the debate was always that BTC could be both SOV and for spending.
No because copper isn’t supposed to be a store of value. Cheap copper is good for a productive society since it has so many uses. A monetary premium on Copper would be detrimental to our current economy. They’re both metals, yeah, but they’re not the same when talking SOV.
You forgot to mention SOV Sovryn
Hilarious how it was Yago from Sovryn that destroyed SatoshiVM with a single question. Sovryn is a legitimate project that has built though multiple bear/bull markets and will release BitcoinOS in 2024. BitcoinOS is an open protocol, and rollups on BitcoinOS can be built with in smart contract language. But $SOV or FUD it, I don’t care. BitcoinOS is going to change everything.
The Spaces scam reveal by Yago was hilarious. If you want a real project that's been through bear/bull markets and has a token that has re-awoken buy $SOV and learn about the Sovryn ecosystem on RSK/Rootstock. [BitcoinOS](https://sovryn.com/bitcoinos) is coming, and it's going to change everything.
The problem with this train of thought - and the "SOV" mantra in general - is that Bitcoin was never created to make people fiat rich. Its initial intent was to REPLACE fiat altogether as fiat currency is central (pun intended) to so many societal woes. There's nothing wrong with becoming fiat rich, but we've really lost the original "freedom money that can't be fucked with" narrative completely at this point, IMHO.
I would actually argue those are detriments to using it as a store of value. For one, just like real estate the utility cases become more expensive due to the monetary premium. As for the investment thesis, when 80%+ of the value is monetary premium you either need to disregard the utility cases from your thesis or you need treat the asset as being 500%+ over valued. In other words, if an economic crisis can force gold into a position where the utility demand is required to form a floor then you are looking at massive losses. If you don’t think that’s actually plausible (I agree) then you realize you don’t need the utility value. You just need the scarcity properties. So that brings me back to it being a downside of using gold as an SOV. All it does is make electronics, jewelry, etc. more expensive.
It depends on your expectation. If you think it will make you rich, then yes it's too late for that. Do you want an alternative SOV to diversify your portfolio, then no it's not too late. Mentally I have it in the same bucket as gold. I own zero gold and BTC, but I see several scenarios in the future where I would add exposure.
LTC does not need to overthrow BTC to be relevant. It continues to be a very efficient means of value transfer and is much cheaper and faster to transact with than BTC and for that reason it has a use case as a cryptoCURRENCY, not just a SOV which BTC has become due to it's slow and expensive transfer fees.
Unfortunately, Bitcoin is a failed project. Maxis like you can spit out platitudes such as Bitcoin is the solution but let's face it, Bitcoin is just a good SOV, and judging from the white paper, I doubt that's what Satoshi intended.
Most of gold's value is actually not derived from its use as a commodity (in dentistry, electronics, art etc). Its very high price premium comes from its *use as money*, specifically a store of value. If BTC were to replace gold as a SOV, gold's price would likely drop >80% down to its actual industrial commodity value.
I agree, Bitcoin and ETH are a complete two different creatures, to me Bitcoin is the perfect SOV digital asset and ETH is a tech platform product like a PC or Windows, ETH is needed as long crypto exists, but it needs to adapt to changes like any other tech product in order to survive against competitors, Bitcoin has no competition in the digital assets sphere.
Plenty of cryptos out there actually being used for thijgs beside SOV m8 . . .
Sure. Since I always try to argue in good faith I assumed he meant 'using' it for purchases. Obviously I won't because it is still in the SOV phase. But whatever. The dude sounds like a Buttcoiner. HFSP.
My pov: Collectible -> SOV -> MoE -> UoA. Btw, BTC hodlers make the floor price. If it weren’t for hodlers, you’d have seen way lower lows than the 15k of Nov 2022 this bear. M
Intrinsic Value not to be confused with the word 'intrinsic, I agree has a specific meaning in finance. There are different types of asset types and I'm not sure that sure whether the objective calculations apply to store-of-value asset types(SOV) because SOVs do not create a cash flow. The objective calculations usually reduce future cash flows to a present value divided by investment costs. Since metal commodities, BTC and the dollar do not produce a cash flow. In the absence of an Intrinsic Value calculation, some then fallback to utility valuation, which for gold and silver is significantly lower than the traded price. By utility value I mean the value to some other manufacturing process. For BTC there is no 3rd party utility value and there is no Intrinsic Value, but for me this does not mean it is valueless. My preference is 'the ledger as value' idea posed by Lyn Alden; that gold, the dollar (and other currencies) and bitcoin offer different means of implementing a ledger. And the features, quality and use determine the relative value of this class. I'm not aware of a financial value calculation for this class, although there may be one.
No. Access to price action without needing to take possession of the underlying asset. Think of Oil. You want to invest in oil. Are you going to buy/transport/store hundreds or thousands of barrels of oil? Of course not. But you want to buy oil when it’s low and sell it when it’s high, right? An oil ETF allows you to do that. It’s just paper exchanging hands based on current prices. Now. To someone on this sub, you might think “that’s absurd! I want my own bitcoin!” And for you, that may be the right answer. But for the TRILLIONS of dollars that are AOM by legacy financial institutions it makes sense. For grandma, it makes sense. For someone with a 401k that they want to point some or all toward a harder money/SOV, it makes sense. Not a “scam.”
Store of value is a necessary step on the way to widespread medium of exchange. If something sucks as a SOV, not many will want to accept it as payment. So yes, Bitcoin will one day be a widespread medium of exchange, but it will take time for it to firmly establish itself in people's minds as the best option for SOV. After that comes unit of account, eg bananas cost 15 sats per lb.
Nobody has ever said owning Sats is a status symbol.. There aren't 120 bn ETH either.. BTC once aimed to be a P2P *currency*. Satoshi wanted to increase the blocksize 30% each 2 years to facilitate increasing activity, to pair with halvings, and we'd all speculate and see increased economics emerge over time. Well.. After Satoshi died, people decided they wanted a "store of value" instead. People will fight to never scale the blocksize even 1%. The idea of Bitcoin being for mass adoption died with Satoshi. BTC is a symbol only, obviously it can never be a currency in this state. It is a "SOV", like gold *bars*... If the chain ever faces congestion, or you simply DCA into the same address once a week for a year, your UTXO fees will be $100s due to the once-temporary now-forever handicapped blocksize - meaning everyone holding only *sats* will be priced out of transacting entirely. If everyone in the world had BTC they'd be able to make just 2 transactions each in their whole life. Bitcoin isn't for people with a few sats, or for people who need blockspace, but huge interest to people who can gamble on a few BTC's ie **price speculation** - the same people who would never use blockchain for anything more than monkey jpgs are the people who buy the most BTC, by design. The BTC narrative right now is literally the Blackrock ETF. People today are pricing in rich money entering the space, not average Joe with $40 'extra' at the end of every month.. Even though ETH is diluted 6x to BTC I can't recall another coin that costs more per each than those two, everything else is either diluted more or worth a lot less. The Veblen good with ETH I think is running a solo validator (or owning a dumb $800K NFT), which right now a validator costs $72.5K to set up and yields ~1.8 ETH annually. The higher the price, the more out of reach 1 coin or 1 validator - and absolutely the more people get FOMO.. You see it with altcoins too. Those people the most will claim BTC is too expensive now, they missed the boat. So they bought Shib/Safemoon to own 10M of something instead, to feel that same psychological ownership someone with 10 BTC feels. 100%, they know Bitcoin is divisible... No one wants 10 microscopic flakes off a gold bar, at least not to make themselves feel better. The few buying 10 Sats isn't what's pumping the price either. Just look at a chart with volume. People open those insane record breaking leverage positions near ATH and never ATL. Or listen to anyone who says they bought at ATH, there are many, and ask them exactly why... I can see no evidence BTH or ETH aren't Veblen goods.
No, it's not perfect. There is no perfect product or crypto. Bitcoin needs to improve its issues with fees and block size. It could be perfect as a SOV but not as a P2P electronic cash which has already failed. On the other side Lightning has also some issues regarding channel management and funding. It's not so different from a bank because sooner or later I will need to rely on someone else's liquidity to make payments and transfers. It's important to say that also if you don't have a good watchtower who custodies your funds, your funds can be stolen. Soooo... I don't see the same philosophy behind "no middlemen involved" applied.
Many inventions turned out to be successful on different usecase. It seems like SOV will be the most significant atm.
Governments of major economic countries will not accept bitcoin as currency until they give up a monetarist policies - that's decades away. However bitcoin might replace gold as a settlement vehicle between governments it looks a better vehicle than the current slow arcane systems. I can imagine that some governments will prefer to continue settle inter-government debt in fiat currencies as they do now, but using CBDCs to prevent bitcoin being used. In the retail sector I don't see what CBDCs would add, systems are quite quick and sophisticated. None of this really impacts bitcoins place as a SOV asset. Small economic countries may still adopt bitcoin. This is all speculation, but I could imagine bitcoin is driving strategic planning at inter-government level to preserve the status quo.
(2) A proud Bitcoin maxi????? What's that supposed to mean? Find me anywhere in the world (apart from some weird Bitcoin maxi region, or El Salvador) where you can buy with your Bitcoin in any store you enter... So you'll gonna have to exchange them constantly to be able to spend them. Or you're just using it as an SOV, your saving account? And you don't have to be a maxi to do that. We're all free in doing so. Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, if it were to be used on a global scale eventually, without some huge improvements, you can even forget to do, on average, more than even a single transaction ever in your life... so far for being a Bitcoin maxi !!
Increasing the blocksize 30% every 2 years would not affect the properties of the network. Do you think miners, at industrial scale already today, can't afford $10 in disk space each year? Or full nodes, for that matter? I agree L2 can be used to achieve greater complexity and scale. I completely disagree there's any possible implementation for an L2 on Bitcoin, which are on-chain by definition. The Bitcoin language intentionally won't allow for it, and miners/Blockstream refuse to update it. E.G. to use Lightning Network to send someone $5 when BTC fees are $25 would cost $55, and there's no self custodial way to buy 'L2 BTC' because it's locked up in some off-chain network. Just compare Ethereum L2s after less than 2 years, to Bitcoin's only L2 after over 6 years. Only 5000 BTC are using Lightning today, $200M, approx 0.025% of the circulating supply, statistically no one in this sub has used it before. 6.64M ETH are inside L2's now which is about 7.5% of all circulating ETH, plus an additional $14B in RWA/stablecoins. CEXs supported ETH L2s before LN. Just a hunch but probably the market thinks Bitcoin's (off-chain non-trustless or else non custodial) scaling design sucks, relative to Ethereum's on-chain L2 design which even itself is far from trusted/safe yet. Lightning released their first whitepaper before the Ethereum whitepaper was written. There has been ample time to adapt and fix the problems with LN or Bitcoin. Ethereum tried to use Lightning tech initially (Plasma) but it failed, while they put out 100s of pages of research why it won't work and how to make it work, that the rest of the industry except Bitcoin has capatalized on in their L2 design already. People are stuck in their ways, while better tech has been battle tested and implemented all without Bitcoin, is it truly sustainable to be stuck in 2015 indefinitely through an emerging tech sector? If there were work being done to achieve goals of scaling or complexity, or they could already be achieved today simply, your argument would have some backing. For now, I don't see how that reflects reality. All that needs to be done is to allow miners to validate ZK-proofs. That way entities can post compressed ZK blocks on L1 to be secured by L1. But people argued that ZKBTC will make Bitcoin *too much like ETH* so it's already a non-starter. Lightning is the only option Blockstream will agree to implementing, yet it sucks and still no work is being done on making it viable after almost a decade. If Bitcoin is a SOV and people are meant to stay in Lightning Network off-chain or in non-custodial wallets like Strike, who's going to pay the miners once BTC inflation isn't high enough to sustain them all? If people want Bitcoin to be used this way they should at least come up with a new whitepaper or better distribution model, because this new off-chain never pay for shit idea doesn't make sense - not in conjunction with halvings that *now* only serve to halve the security budget each ~3.5 years, because now no one is using or consuming or doing anything with BTC blockspace even after 95% distribution.
Bitcoin is not just a SOV. It’s a secure base layer to build everything else on. A design decision to not scale infinitely on L1 in order to protect the properties of the network doesn’t mean those properties can’t be achieve on L2 or higher