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 didn't say I want to resist anything Mr Rebel lol But it is a resistance SOV that's why it's valuable and it will be an SOV well before commonly used as an MoE. We are seeing an adoption arc that fundamentally makes sense at current juncture, what it looks like in 2 decades is anyone's guess but I personally don't sell rapidly ascending assets ;)
It was an MOE already... it's only a SOV now because it failed as money due to its physical nature.
I'm not saying gold can become a MOE. I'm saying its value is a SOV.
You are not even in the lobby of the rabbit hole sir. Its a start though You cannot have MOE without SOV first, and neither could gold. I'm not sure how thing gold became money in the first place. As if we all decided to trade it suddenly.
Bitcoin is starting to have smart contract capabilities, so ETH is not so special anymore. Also, crypto money flows more to BTC based on the SOV narrative.
This is how monetization **HAS TO** work. 1. Store of value (SOV): People must want to hold the money. 2. Medium of Exchange (MOE): enough people must hold it that it makes sense to use it as money 3. Unit of account (UOA): Enough people use it for payment that it makes sense to measure price signal with it. Bitcoin will not be a stable money for years though. It has a tremendous amount of appreciation needed before then. It will have to have a $50T+ cap to be a stable money
You are retail. Otherwise, I wouldn't need to explain a SOV to you.
You're going to need to get over that Bitcoin is a SOV, everything gets tokenized, securities/commodities/etc get issued on L1.
Not surprising Just remember yall, you asked for this. In 2017 when there was a clear delineation on where to take bitcoin the community folded and went with the SOV narrative. This doomed on chain scaling as well as development for legacy financials takeover and immediate NGU. Meanwhile the coin that shall not be named has put in the work to lay the foundation for legitimate defi that actually frees humanity from the financial corruption we see here.
"No coin is "owed" a break of ATH" \-I agree "Thats not how this works" \-it is exactly how it works. 100billion premined XRP. All existed on chain and moved wallets multiple times. THEY WERE IN CIRCULATION AND STILL ARE. They are just locked in escrow. What is stopping them from selling the Wallets that receive the un-escrowed coins? Nothing. "XRP has no business" \-Any coin can be a store of value. The only reason BTC has the SOV as its main reason for existence is because it failed at its original goal, peer to peer transactions. Ever heard of the internet of value?? "Seems like XRP is tied to ripple then and is more of a fintech than decentralised consensus" \-not sure what your trying say here. Yes XRP is tied to Ripple its one of the biggest positives of XRP. "Why is it in the best position?" \-because of its backing by Ripple the organisation and its integration with the finance world. Ethereum is a shit coin compared to XRP WHEN IT COMES TO FINANCE AND THE TRANSFER OF VALUE. "Sol, Hbar, plenty of other more efficient coins aren't anywhere near XRP value" \-That is because they do not have a company like Ripple behind them or many years of work put into integrating with tradfi. "Then why is there almost no adoption" \-The SEC case did not help, The Maxi nonsense does not help, The previous administration didn’t help, The fear and Protectionism from the current financial system didn’t help. But XRP is still here trying. "Priced in" \- not if the end result is a retraction of the fine and injunction "Means nothing if no one adopts it." \-I agree. $232billion is not nothing so far. "U trust trump to pump ur bags" \-no
>Yes it may have gone up 10x but it still has not breached its all time high. Many currencies have hit all time highs this run. No coin is "owed" a break of ATH. >Firstly there are 100billion XRP, Just because they went from on chain to on chain escrowed doesn't mean they don't exist. So at 2.23 they are worth 223billion USD. Thats not how this works; besides that's even worse, because there's dilution and selling pressure when they are vested. >-Because lots of people believe they have value and are willing to pay for them, just like Bitcoin. Bitcoins value case is different to XRP. Bitcoin is the only cryptocurrency that is viewed as a digital SOV and truly decentralised portable cash. XRP has no business here so this point is invalid. >Because they have a company with offices all over the world with very skilled employees backing them Seems like XRP is tied to ripple then and is more of a fintech than decentralised consensus. >Because with regulation forming and the finance industry being given the green light to use crypto currencies XRP is in the best position to benefit Why is it in the best position? Ethereum is way, way more widely adopted and XRP is 75% away from flipping it. (Unless u include the baseless XRP shill talk adoption) >Because the XRPL is energy efficient Sol, Hbar, plenty of other more efficient coins aren't anywhere near XRP value. >Because the XRPL has stood it's ground and the test of time. There is a reason that its still in the top 10 after a decade and has been the ONLY crypto currency to have ever had a higher market cap than BTC It has stood the test of time that's true. But it NEVER flipped bitcoin. Again, u have fallen for the ripple mental gymnastics in market cap calculation. Common myth, but nothing has ever flipped btc >Because the XRPLs tech is leaps and bounds above most other blockchains Then why is there almost no adoption >Because the SEC case brought by ETH lawyers is about to be concluded Priced in >Because Ripple has a huge war chest of crypto currency and USD to develop the XRP ecosystem with and protect it(see SEC lawsuit) Means nothing if no one adopts it. >Because it is the biggest USA crypto currency which Trump seems to be in favour of. U trust trump to pump ur bags?
This is how money is adopted: SOV, then MOE, then UOA We are still at SOV because there is SO much upside left during monetization Eventually, it will be used far more. There is also the problem of taxes that make it hard to spend Once that is gone Bitcoin will just be money eventually.
He didn’t legitimize BTC as a SOV at all lmao, and appointing a “Crypto Czar” is hilariously useless. He acknowledges crypto as a way to pump and dump idiots who believe in him. He’s not doing anything for crypto without his own self interests in mind.
My claim is he has done more for crypto than Biden: He appointed a crypto czar who is tasked with overseeing the crypto space which can include making clear understandable regulations. He had a summit with important people in crypto, which means he at least acknowledges crypto rather going Warden's or Sherman's route. He legitimized BTC as an SOV which can lead to other countries follow suit. These were off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more.
Replace Apple the company with any rev focused L1 network and it's the same exact thing. It's actually much better as the economic structure of the base asset is much harder. Solana, Hyperliquid, and others use the same formula as a security, but instead of buying a piece of a company for exposure to revenue you are buying a piece of a network for exposure to revenue. Tokens can work the same way. Tokens can even be securities. COIN will be a security on Base soon. It's going to take some time before people learn the difference between a meme and tokens that have value exposure or are connected to an underlying asset with value exposure. Stop trying to call crypto one asset class. It's many. You're extremely late to the party if you don't get this by now. BTC is a SOV like gold. It's the only blockchain based asset that doesn't need revenue. Everything else does.
Bitcoin is the only crypto that's a real SOV. Everything else needs revenue or it needs to be a token with an underlying asset or mechanism that captures revenue. No one serious ever thought we'd use shitcoins as currency. Activity is revenue. Not sure how this sub still struggles to understand this. Just because we pump up XRP because of a market cycle or a bet on a SEC case does not mean you should be holding a glorified meme with no revenue. L1s need massive activity for revenue. Tokens need to be connected to rev producing protocols or securities. Otherwise, the token better represent ownership over anything with value like land, SOVs, etc. Otherwise, you are literally buying memes that pretend to be something they're not. It's not hard to determine which L1s or tokens have value generation and capture. Revenue or bust. The things this sub says to hold are the quickest ways to burn money. Just hold Bitcoin if you can't figure out what has revenue or potential for revenue. Do NOT buy what this sub thinks is a buy. Even if the price moves up, just like memes can move up, doesn't mean you'll actually walk away with money. Invest. Don't gamble on junk no one uses, and captures no value. Use the chains and protocols everyone in this space uses if you want better insight on how to invest instead of gambling on junk because someone on Reddit says it's going up.
Its repurposed in some ways. It's not 'the future of finance'. Use case is still borderless, truly decentralised money but with the addition of SOV. It will be worth whatever people are willing to pay for that. You can't value it like a company.
Hello. What do SOV, MOE and UOA stand for? I'm currently learning about this (crypto, bitcoin)
Bitcoin - SOV like gold but better. It's one of only two true SOVs in the world. Means it doesn't need revenue to move up in price per unit. It's the only way to store value without fear of dilution. BTC will eventually become the world's largest SOV because it acts as the best SOV. Ethereum - Is the silver to Bitcoin's gold. It's attempting to have utility by capturing revenue through the cost of using the chain, but most of that revenue is now getting captured by its layer 2's like Base. That revenue then gets sent to the layer 2 owners like Coinbase. However, some will argue it's the internet's second true currency, and it doesn't need revenue like Bitcoin. Highly debated. XRP - Is a meme coin. People think it has revenue or purpose because the price went up this cycle. It doesn't. It's a meme. It captures pretty much no value. It competes as a currency with BTC & USD, but no one serious actually views it as real currency. Solana - is the network which captures the majority of all revenue in web 3. That value gets sent back to SOL holders. You buy SOL to be exposed to the revenue of the network. Single protocols on Solana bring in more revenue than Ethereum itself. Pretty much all new tokens get issued on Solana and Base. This means more revenue from speculation and more SOL locked in the liquidity pools of each successful business or project launched on Solana. Think of SOL like a stock but the revenue comes from chain activity instead of the entity that issued it. Again, no one serious views SOL as a currency that competes with USD/BTC.
Ok you are right, central control is an incorrect term here. Although, my main point that the us gov wants BTC to "succeed" as long as they make a boatload of money off it. When large financial institutions are getting less and less returns on BTC, the coin will die a slow death, because it has no usecase besides SOV.
Agreed on all points, but many core Bitcoin holders will disagree about the ethics part. They'll claim Bitcoin's purpose was to never mess with monetary policy and never freeze anyone from their money. I know it's an argument that doesn't make sense, but it will be fought. They won't care if some of the supply is eventually taken. They'll just argue that the new owners will likely not sell either. Which many won't. BTC isn't going to stop moving up. Just like any true SOV. They'll eventually lose to the more common sense approach, but it will be a long dumb battle. Especially as alt coin KOLs try to push that if Bitcoin changes policy it failed. It'll add pressure to do nothing about the old addresses. Either way, this all doesn't matter in the long run. The value stays with the ledger. Bitcoin could be attacked, cease to operate, or anything and we can just restart the ledger from the last block or move it to literally a token on Ethereum or Solana. The value is in the ledger. It's just a score bored and we can copy/paste the scores into a new ledger if needed. BlackRock, countries, states, financial institutions aren't just going to put trillions of their dollars at risk from not upgrading in. They'll upgrade easily, but the argument about old addresses will go on for some time.
Gold has tons of great uses. Almost all of them are priced out by people buying it as a store of value. After SOV and wealth-signaling bidders, only the highest ROI industrial applications can afford to use gold. Point being, the large majority of gold's value is from SOV. If it was primarily industrial, platinum would have kept up with gold over the past couple decades.
Yep. Also btc isn't currently in competition with fiat, it's in competition with every SOV asset. If you have friends with stocks, RE I find this to be a very easy sell as they already hold assets and get that you don't save piles of cash to rot to debasement. You guys are caught up on btc vs fiat. That makes no sense on the jump to even seasoned investors.
I'm not teaching you everything. Revenue or bust. That's it. You don't hit 2 trillion without revenue unless consensus has been reached that it's a SOV. This isn't hard.
>BlackRock now sees it as risk off They recommend 1 to 2% of it only in your port. You sure? > When presidents campaign on an asset, and countries debate adding it to reserves, it won. People are dumb. I'm not convinced. > No one needs the L1 to scale. BTC will be mostly transmitted through money transmitters and custody will be through ETFs and banks. It's already happening. There is no better SOV in the world. Every serious financial asset can dilute you. Not BTC. No alt will ever repeat this because we don't need them to, and they could never replicate the launch/history of BTC. All just opinions of yours. > You guys have been mid arguing the same things for 15 years as BTC continues to eat away at the world's previous best SOV, gold. All while it has sent almost all alt pairs to 0. If you don't get it by now, you're not going to get it until it eventually just keeps pace with the S&P. I have not been complaining about btc for 15 years. I supported it until it hits its ATH of 100k. > No, I don't need to type Bitcoin "is seen as a real SOV" to make it one lol. Look around you. The world already reached consensus on this. Countries aren't going to fight storing their wealth in XRP just to enrich Ripple. Not how any of this works. People think a lot of stuff, like that gay people should be killed. If an economic problem occurred, I'm sure an "asset" like bitcoin which throws energy away and produces nothing would collapse. > Revenue or bust unless the asset is a true SOV. Exactly why BTC has now reached trillions of dollars without revenue. That only works with real SOVs. You have no understanding of finance if this doesn't make sense to you. Do you know how market caps work? $2 trillion hasn't been stored into bitcoin. Market cap is the current price of the asset times the total supply. As for why it has gone up, lots of people are dumb and have mindlessly fallen in love with bitcoin. These things don't need a solid reason. It has nothing to do with "understanding finance". Was bitcoin a good bet 10+ years ago? Yeah. But to cling to old tech is just really foolish. That will never be acceptable. Bitcoin might keep going up as it is but that doesn't make it a good and valuable asset. It just means people are dumb -- like the president bitcoiners helped elect.
Yeah, I've heard these mid arguments since 2011. Everything needs revenue except BTC/Gold as these are true SOVs. When presidents campaign on an asset, and countries debate adding it to reserves, it won. BlackRock now sees it as risk off, but reddiors still arguing if it should be taken seriously or if it's too risky. 🤣 No one needs the L1 to scale. BTC will be mostly transmitted through money transmitters and custody will be through ETFs and banks. It's already happening. There is no better SOV in the world. Every serious financial asset can dilute you. Not BTC. No alt will ever repeat this because we don't need them to, and they could never replicate the launch/history of BTC. You guys have been mid arguing the same things for 15 years as BTC continues to eat away at the world's previous best SOV, gold. All while it has sent almost all alt pairs to 0. If you don't get it by now, you're not going to get it until it eventually just keeps pace with the S&P. No, I don't need to type Bitcoin "is seen as a real SOV" to make it one lol. Look around you. The world already reached consensus on this. Countries aren't going to fight storing their wealth in XRP just to enrich Ripple. Not how any of this works. Revenue or bust unless the asset is a true SOV. Exactly why BTC has now reached trillions of dollars without revenue. That only works with real SOVs. You have no understanding of finance if this doesn't make sense to you.
>Bitcoin doesn't use energy per transaction. I'm aware. Miners use energy to mine blocks every 10 minutes, but if you divide the energy per transaction, in the average bitcoin transaction uses at least 1719 kWh alone. If I had to pay for that energy in California, I'd pay over $700 in energy. It's a *lot* of energy. > It uses energy to secure a multi trillion dollar network. To help people gamble and to keep the rich bitcoiners rich because they bought a decade ago and want to keep their bags nice and fat. Nothing else. > Is this what crypto Reddit will become now that everyone here got wrecked while BTC goes up? Just complain about Bitcoin? The l1 doesn't even need to scale. 7 transactions per second and too much energy thrown into the void. It does indeed need to change. ALGO is doing over 12k TPS. > You guys realize BTC is a real SOV? Like gold. Why, just because you typed out that BTC is digital gold? I don't think that's how reality works... > Your xyz alt isn't. Never will be. Your alt needs revenue or it will never go up long. There are plenty of digital assets (Even an L1) with revenue. The same thing can be said about bitcoin, so I don't know why you say this. I also don't hold any significant amounts of creepto. > Not sure why so salty about a new gold competitor. Not sure why so salty that people believe the tech on bitcoin is bad.
Bitcoin doesn't use energy per transaction. It uses energy to secure a multi trillion dollar network. Is this what crypto Reddit will become now that everyone here got wrecked while BTC goes up? Just complain about Bitcoin? The l1 doesn't even need to scale. You guys realize BTC is a real SOV? Like gold. Your xyz alt isn't. Never will be. Your alt needs revenue or it will never go up long. There are plenty of digital assets (Even an L1) with revenue. Not sure why so salty about a new gold competitor.
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.