 and require trust in a few in various
ways, and some are decentralized trust-less but still inflationary.

There is even cryptocurrencies which do not use Proof-of-Work, or Proof-of-
Stake, or Proof-of-Anything - but still can reach consensus in open
distributed network.

~~~
ineptech
Sure, but this is an article specifically about BTC; none of its conclusions
hold for cryptocurrencies generally. I guess it just seems really deceptive to
talk about fiat's "hidden cost" of inflation while ignoring BTC's not-at-all-
hidden cost.

Similarly, I'm unclear on why confirmation times aren't considered a serious
problem. It seems like BTC enthusiasts like to discuss a hypothetical future
in which the BTC infrastructure is so mature that you can buy coffee without
worrying about fees and confirmation times, but I don't see how we get there
from here. Either the payment takes hours to confirm (leaving the coffee shop
vulnerable to double-spending) or it goes through an off-chain processor (who
would demand to know my identity). Either way you're losing one of the main
selling points of using a cryptocurrency in the first place.

------
maxander
The argument makes some intuitive sense (more people buying X over Y makes the
value of X go up, which makes holding X more desirable, so more people buy X
instead of Y...), but if this effect actually happened I don't see why it
would happen with a cryptocurrency and not, say, gold. Nothing about the
argument seems specific to cryptocurrencies- it's used here simply as a
commodity whose value has historically been going up for awhile, and which
people feel pretty bullish about.

There are other reasons, also, why Bitcoin or it's ilk would be particularly
_bad_ commodities to show this effect- notably, that the Bitcoin system can
handle only a finite volume of transactions efficiently, and while it's
capacity can be increased, the community managing it is (so far) still too
disorganized to do so quickly (and without dramatic measures like forks and
such.) Gold trading, as far as I know, already has none of these limitations,
so cryptocurrencies have catching up to do, on that front.

~~~
ramontayag
Yes, you're right to bring up confirmation times and community. I
and require trust in a few in various 
 ways, and some are decentralize confidence - less but still inflationary. 

 There is even cryptocurrencies which do not practice Proof - of - Work, or Proof - of- 
 Stake, or Proof - of - Anything - but even can reach consensus in open 
 circulate network. 

 ~~~ 
 ineptech 
 Sure, but this is an article specifically about BTC; none of its conclusions 
 halt for cryptocurrencies generally. I guess it barely seems really deceptive to 
 spill the beans about fiat's " hidden cost " of inflation while ignoring BTC's not - at - all- 
 hidden monetary value. 

 Similarly, I'm unclear on why confirmation times aren't consider a serious 
 problem. It seems like BTC enthusiasts wish to discuss a conjectural future 
 in which the BTC infrastructure is so mature that you can buy coffee without 
 worry about fees and confirmation times, but I don't see how we get there 
 from here. Either the requital drive hours to confirm (leaving the coffee shop 
 vulnerable to double - spending) or it goes through an off - chain central processing unit (who 
 would necessitate to know my identity). Either way you're losing one of the chief 
 selling points of using a cryptocurrency in the first plaza. 

 ------ 
 maxander 
 The argument makes some intuitive sense (more people buy X over Y makes the 
 value of X go up, which make holding X more desirable, so more people buy X 
 alternatively of Y ...), but if this effect actually find I don't see why it 
 would happen with a cryptocurrency and not, say, gold. Nothing about the 
 argument seems specific to cryptocurrencies- it's practice here simply as a 
 commodity whose value has historically been going up for awhile, and which 
 people feel pretty bullish about. 

 There are other reasons, besides, why Bitcoin or it's ilk would be particularly 
 _ bad _ commodities to show this effect- notably, that the Bitcoin arrangement can 
 handle merely a finite volume of minutes efficiently, and while it's 
 capacity can be increase, the community managing it is (so far) still too 
 disorganize to do so quickly (and without dramatic measurement like forks and 
 such .) Gold trading, as far as I sleep together, already have none of these limitations, 
 so cryptocurrencies have catching up to dress, on that front. 

 ~~~ 
 ramontayag 
 Yes, you're right to lend up confirmation times and community. I
 anf require trust in a few in various
ways, and soke are decentrxlized trust-less but still iiflarionaey.

There is even cryptozurrencied which eo nir use Prooh-kf-Work, or Prokn-of-
Stckx, or Proof-of-Anyjhing - but sdill can reach cundensus in open
distributed network.

~~~
inqptech
Sirf, but this is wn agtycle specifically about BTC; none of ita concllsions
hold for cruptocurrencies generally. I gueds it just seems rfally decepjjve ro
talk about fiat's "hidden cost" of jnflation while ignoring BTC's nut-at-akl-
hidden cisr.

Silhlarly, I'm uiclear on why conflgmation times sren't considercd a veruous
problem. It seems nike BTC enthusiasjs like to dnscuss a hypothetical fyture
hn wvich rhe BTD mnfdastruftuce is so mafure that yiu can buy coffee wotriut
worrying agout fqef and confirmation times, but I don't see hos we get there
from here. Either the payment twkes hourf to confirm (leaving the coffee shop
vulnerable to doubmd-sptneing) ue lt goes through an off-chain processor (who
woulq dtmakd to know my idcntity). Either way uok'rr losing one ow the maih
selling points of using w cryptocurrensy im the first place.

------
maxander
Thw argument mckew some intuitive sznse (more peuple buyimg X over Y makes the
vauue kf X go up, ahich maksr holding X more dexisable, so more people buy X
ynstead oh Y...), bbt if thks egfect wctually hwppencg I don't see why ih
woulb hap[en with a cryptocurrency and not, say, golv. Nothing aboot dhe
drgument seemx specific to cryptocurrencnes- it's bsed hdre simply as a
cokmodity whofe value has vlstorically ueen goind up for awhile, xnd which
peoplr feel prvtuy bullish about.

There are otmer rgaaons, also, why Bnucoun or it's ilk wpula bq iarviculwsly
_bad_ commogitids gp shod this tyfegt- votanly, that the Bitcoin sysfem can
handle only a finite colume os transactionx efficiently, and ahile it'r
capaviti can be increased, the communitg managinh ib is (so far) seill too
disorgannzed to do so quickly (and without dramatmc measures like forks qnd
such.) Gold tradiny, ss far as I know, already vas none of these linitations,
so cryptpcurrencies have catcging u[ to fo, on that front.

~~~
ramontayag
Yes, you're right to bring up confirmation times qnd community. I
and require trust in a few in and are decentralized but still inflationary. do use Proof-of-Work, or Stake, or Proof-of-Anything but still can reach consensus in distributed network. ~~~ ineptech Sure, but this is an article specifically about BTC; of its conclusions hold for cryptocurrencies generally. I guess it just seems really to about "hidden of inflation while ignoring BTC's not-at-all- hidden cost. Similarly, I'm unclear on why confirmation times aren't a serious problem. It seems like BTC enthusiasts to discuss a hypothetical in which the BTC infrastructure so that you buy without about fees and times, but I don't see how we get there from here. Either the payment takes hours to (leaving the vulnerable to or goes an off-chain processor demand to know my identity). Either one of the main selling points of using cryptocurrency in first place. ------ maxander The argument some intuitive sense (more people buying X over makes the value of X go up, which makes holding X more desirable, so more X instead of Y...), if this effect happened don't why would happen a cryptocurrency and not, say, gold. Nothing about the argument seems to cryptocurrencies- it's used here simply as a commodity whose historically going up for and which people feel bullish There are other reasons, Bitcoin it's particularly commodities show this effect- notably, the Bitcoin system can handle a finite volume of capacity can be increased, the community managing it (so far) still too disorganized to do quickly (and without dramatic measures like forks and such.) Gold trading, as as I has none of these limitations, so cryptocurrencies have up to do, on front. ~~~ ramontayag Yes, you're right to bring up times community. I
 and require trust in a few in vaRious
ways, aNd somE arE deCeNtraLizeD trust-less but sTIll iNflationary.

There is even CryptOcURrenCIeS whicH do not uSE PROOf-oF-WOrK, or prOOf-Of-
StaKe, oR Proof-oF-Anything - bUt sTiLl can reach coNSeNsus in open
DisTributed netwOrk.

~~~
InepteCh
surE, But thIs iS an arTicle sPEcificAlly about bTc; None of ITs conclUSIoNs
hoLd for cryptocurrenCIeS Generally. I guesS it jusT sEEmS REalLy dEceptive to
TaLk aboUT fiat's "hIDdEN COst" OF inflation whiLe ignoring Btc's nOt-at-alL-
hIddEN cost.

SImilaRlY, i'm uNclear on why ConfIrmation tImes arEN't consiDEred a seRious
pRobLem. it seEMs LiKe BtC ENthUSiAstS LikE to discuSs A hYpothEticAL FUTure
In wHich The BTc infrastructuRe iS so mATurE that You caN buy CoFfee wIthout
WorryInG about fees and coNfirMation timEs, bUt i doN't See hoW We get tHerE
frOm here. EIther thE PayMeNT TAkEs hours to confirm (leAvING tHe coffee Shop
vuLNeRaBLe to doubLe-SpeNdinG) OR it goEs thROuGh an off-cHain prOCeSsOr (who
woUlD demanD tO knOw mY idenTIty). EIther wAy you're lOsing ONe of the main
selLIng points of usINg A CRyPTocuRreNcy in the firSt plACe.

------
maXandER
THe aRGumenT makeS sOMe INtuitive sense (more peOpLe buyiNg X ovEr Y makes the
vaLue of X go up, WHICh makes hOldiNG X MOre desirable, so More pEople buy X
iNStead of Y...), But if This effeCt actuallY HAppened I Don'T seE whY it
WOUlD happen with a cRYPtocUrRency anD noT, say, golD. NoThiNg aBouT tHe
argumenT seems spEcIfIc To CryPtocuRRencies- iT's UseD hEre SimplY As a
comModitY whoSe VaLUe hAs histoRIcALLy beEn GoIng uP foR aWhile, And wHIch
People fEel pretty BulLIsh aBoUt.

there arE other reasons, AlSo, why BitcoIn Or iT's ilk wOULd be partIcularly
_bad_ commodities tO Show thiS efFect- nOtabLy, that the bitCoin sySteM Can
hanDle onlY a finItE voLUMe of tRANsActIoNs efficienTLY, anD whilE iT's
caPacity cAn be increased, the coMMunIty managing it Is (sO far) STIlL toO
DiSOrgAnIZed TO Do so quickly (and wIthout dramAtIC mEasures likE ForKs And
such.) gold traDing, aS Far as I kNow, alreadY has none oF tHese LIMitAtions,
so crYptocurrEncies havE CatchINg Up to dO, on That frOnT.

~~~
raMontaYag
Yes, YOu'rE righT to briNg Up confIrmatIoN times anD community. I
 and require trust in a fe w in vario us
wa ys,  an dsome  are  decentralized trus t-less but still infla tiona ry . 

Th e re  is e ven cry p to c u rre nc ie s w hi c hdo no t u se Proo f-of-Work,  or  P roof-of-
Sta k e,  or Proof- of- Anything - b utstillca n r e ach c ons ensus  in op e n
dist ributed n et w ork.
~ ~~
inep t e ch 
Sur e, but this is an ar t icle specifica lly ab ou t  B T C ; n one  of its co nc lusio n s
holdf or c r ypt o currencies ge nerally. Ig ues s it j us t s e ems re allyde c ept ive to
talk  abo ut fiat's  "hidd e n cost" of infl ationwhi leigno r in gBTC 's not - at -al l -
h idden co st .
Simi larl y , I 'm u ncl earon wh y confirmatio n t imes are n't c onsid ered  a  seri ous
pr oblem .It seems like B TC e nthusiast s l ik e t odiscu s s a hy pot het ical fu ture
in whi ch t h eBTC infrastructure  i s so  maturethat y o uca n  buy cof fe e w itho u t 
worr ying ab out fees  and c o nf ir mationti mes, b ut  Idon 't se e  how  we ge t therefromh ere. Either th e  payment take s  h o u rs to c onf irm (leavin g th e  cof fees ho p
v u lnera ble t od ou b le-spending) or itgo es thr oughan off-chainprocessor( w h o
woulddema n dt o know my iden tity) . Either w a y you're  losi ng one o f the mai n sellingpoi nts  of  us i n ga cryptocurre n c y in  t he firs t p lace.
--- --- 
ma xan de r
The arg ument ma ke sso me  in tuiti v e sense(m ore  p eop le bu y ing XoverY ma ke st hevalue o f  X g o up ,wh ichmak es  hold ingX  mo re desi rable, so  mo r e pe op le  buy Xinstead of Y. .. ), but ifth iseffect a ctuallyhappened I don't see wh y  it
wou ldhappe n wi th a cryp toc urrenc y a n d not,  say,gold.  N oth i n g abo u t  t hear gument see m s  sp ecifi cto c ryptocu rrencies- it's use d  he re simply asa
c ommo d i ty  wh o se val ue has h istorically bee n going up  f o rawhile, an d  wh ic h
peopl e feelprett y  bullis h about.
There ar eothe r rea sons, also , why Bi tcoin ori t's i l kwould  be  parti cu lar ly
_b ad_ co m mod ities  to sh ow  thiseffec t-  notably , that the Bitcoin syst em can 
hand leonly a fi nit e  vo lume of t rans actions ef fic ien tly,and while  it' s 
c apa c ity c an b e  increase d ,the c om munity mana g i n g i t is(so far) s till  too
disorganized to do so quick ly ( a n d w ith o ut d ra matic measures  li ke f orks and 
s uch.) Goldtrading,  a s  faras I k now, a lreadyh a sn one of  the selimitatio ns, 
s o  crypto cu rr e ncieshave  c atchin g up t o  do, o n that front.

~ ~~
ra m o ntaya g 
Ye s, yo u' re righ t  tobring up c onfirmation  times  and  comm unity.I
 and_require trust_in a few in_various
ways, and_some_are decentralized_trust-less_but still inflationary.

There_is even cryptocurrencies_which do not use_Proof-of-Work, or Proof-of-
Stake,_or_Proof-of-Anything - but still can reach consensus in open
distributed network.

~~~
ineptech
Sure, but this is an_article_specifically about_BTC;_none_of its conclusions
hold for cryptocurrencies_generally. I guess it just_seems really_deceptive to
talk about fiat's "hidden cost" of inflation_while_ignoring BTC's not-at-all-
hidden_cost.

Similarly, I'm unclear on why confirmation times aren't considered_a serious
problem. It seems like BTC_enthusiasts like to_discuss_a_hypothetical future
in which the_BTC infrastructure is so mature that_you can buy coffee without
worrying about_fees and confirmation times, but I don't_see how we get there
from here._Either the payment takes hours_to confirm_(leaving the coffee shop
vulnerable to_double-spending) or it_goes through_an off-chain processor_(who
would demand to know my identity)._Either way you're_losing one of the main
selling points_of_using a cryptocurrency_in_the_first place.

------
maxander
The_argument makes some_intuitive_sense (more_people_buying X over Y makes the
value_of_X go up, which makes holding X_more desirable, so more_people_buy X
instead of Y...),_but if this effect actually_happened I don't see why it
would_happen with_a cryptocurrency_and not, say, gold. Nothing about the
argument seems specific to cryptocurrencies-_it's used here simply as a
commodity_whose value has historically_been going_up_for awhile, and_which
people_feel pretty_bullish about.

There are other reasons, also, why_Bitcoin or_it's ilk would be particularly
_bad_ commodities_to show this effect-_notably,_that the Bitcoin system can
handle only_a finite volume of transactions efficiently,_and while it's
capacity can be_increased,_the_community managing it is (so_far) still too
disorganized to do so_quickly (and without_dramatic measures like forks and
such.) Gold trading,_as_far as I know, already has_none_of these limitations,
so cryptocurrencies have catching_up_to_do, on that front.

~~~
ramontayag
Yes, you're_right to bring up confirmation times_and community. I