|
|
|
|
|
|
by roma1n
3073 days ago
|
|
|
OK, so Bitcoin is censorship-resistant. Good. But a practical alternative that would allow high-volume, cheap transactions could blow it off the water. This is weird; I keep seeing 'justifications' of Bitcoin's current value and future success that, to me, can simply be reduced to a sunk-cost fallacy. I have read for instance that Bitcoin's worth 'is the area under curve of the energy expense of the miners' (sunk-cost fallacy) or that it has a "pareto-like" quality, being the first largely capitalized cryptocurrency, that would make it immune from failure. Are there any justifications for Bitcoin that cannot be explained by a cognitive bias? |
|
|
Are you aware that you can put nearly everything in this sentence instead of Bitcoin and it still holds just as true?
Free markets haven't really made the world totally fair. Democracy hasn't really given all people the ability to choose. Your job hasn't really paid you as much as you've produced value for your boss. Marrying your wife was a questionable choice, to some degree. And your parents also don't really love each other anymore. Your life isn't really meaningful to anything but the fantasy you run yourself in your head to explain it.
We live off of the cognitive biases that we are able to believe in. Enjoy having some cognitive biases left as long as you still have some.