[digi_owl]

Because at least Bitcoin has never really been a currency, it has been a (virtual) commodity with a (public) ledger attached.

Blasted thing from the outset emulated gold, thus attracting "survivalists" and other goldbugs from across the world.

And that is perhaps why Wall Street is moving in, because those companies are at their core built around siphoning the arbitrage on shuffling commodities around.

And with cryptocurrencies they have an ample supply of such commodities, until the earth boils from waste computing heat.

Perverse incentives to the Nth. The paperclip maximizers are already upon us, and they didn't come from the AI lab, they came from the trading floor.

[opportune]

This is blatant erasure. Bitcoin was perfectly fine as a currency for most of its existence, and for a long time captured almost all crypto volume

[zanny]

The mechanics of transactions worked for currency purposes, but the fundamental architecture of bitcoin has always been hostile to its use as money.

The fixed coin payouts per block, the halving every four years, and the eventual final and finite fixed supply, combined with arbitrary blocksize limits means bitcoin was always designed to hit its limits at 2014 transaction volume.

I traded btc back then for the novelty and bought stuff with it in physical and digital to say I did, but even then the architecture promoted hoarding over spending, and anyone using bitcoin as a currency then is likely lamenting the things they traded it for now which is just about rule 0 of how to make a dysfunctional money.

The crpytocurrency that is actually a currency is one that can use its design to promote its practicality as money - the goal should be no fees, instant signature ledgers that don't consume power on national scales, and an adaptive but predictable algorithm for money creation that can respond to the market to try to keep the currency stable - when transaction volume and coin turnover are high the currency is inflating so you want to reduce minting to try to curtail the effect. When money slows down and starts squatting in wallets you turn up printing to drive deflation.

Anything else in my mind at this point is just a cash grab using the proven mechanisms of bitcoin and an out of control hype train to rob people.

[digi_owl]

The more i read and discuss money, the more i loath the terminology of "good" and "bad" money.

This in that the supposed "good" money is money that incentivize hoarding, while "bad" money supposedly incentivize spending.

The use of good and bad is loaded to put it mildly, and plant a bias in the reader.