6 ms·
Fully disagree. Tokenization enables better financial markets. Bitcoin is the useless asset since it's proven that productive assets (think stocks) are better s
by robjeiter 2y ago
Fully disagree. Tokenization enables better financial markets. Bitcoin is the useless asset since it's proven that productive assets (think stocks) are better store of values than unproductive ones (think gold). Ethereum in that sense is productive because you can stake it for a yield and collaterize it natively to borrow against it and you can tokenize anything on top of it.
- hocuspocus 2y agoWhy would you need a blockchain for tokenization?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- leishman 2y agoIf tokenization requires a trusted party to issue the tokens (think stocks) then no blockchain is needed
- kinakomochidayo 2y agoThen that means stablecoins aren’t needed. And yet, reality disagrees with your logic and stablecoins are on track to be used even more. Tokenization on Ethereum will end up being way more important and useful than pet rock Bitcoin.
- hocuspocus 2y agoThe most popular stablecoins aren't trustless, proving the parent's point.
- kinakomochidayo 2y agoParent's point is weak - it's not possible right now for people around the world to hold fiat/stocks in their own centralized, custodial wallets due to stringent KYC/AML, and blockchains currently fill that need for stablecoins, and will fill that need for tokenized stocks, treasuries, etc.
- hocuspocus 2y agoAnd again, nobody needs blockchains to tokenize centrally issued securities.
- wslh 2y agoThere's an intermediary scenario to consider: when multiple trusted parties are involved. This is basic computer science, and software engineering: crash and byzantine fault-tolerant systems. On a related note, blockchains often obscure the true consensus mechanism behind layers of complex jargon. Upon closer inspection, consensus is still built on trusted parties, just not the same ones typically found in the traditional economy. In Bitcoin, for example, you not only have the relatively few powerful miners but also the Bitcoin Core developers, who wield significant influence over which changes are incorporated into the Bitcoin node. For example, enabling the OP_CAT opcode again [1][2]. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoTechnology/comments/19bik6z/unveiling_the_potential_of_op_cat_in_bitcoin_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoTechnology/comments/19bik6z/u... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/19adyi0/should_op_cat_be_activated/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/19adyi0/should_op_...
- kinakomochidayo 2y agoThere’s also ASIC manufacturing monopoly
- leishman 2y ago[flagged]
- losteric 2y agoWhy bitcoin instead of doge or any of the other digital golds?
- leishman 2y agoNetwork effect, first-mover advantage, and fair launch that did not pre-mine coins for insiders. It's the only "pure" one because it was first and honest.
- kinakomochidayo 2y agoSatoshi ninja-mined in the beginning for themselves. If they had posted about Bitcoin further in advance and had many more people mining, that would’ve been different.
- do_not_redeem 2y agoSatoshi embedded the day's newspaper headline in the genesis block, as proof that he did not ninja-mine in the beginning for himself.
- kinakomochidayo 2y agoThere were only few others mining, so they mined many blocks for themselves through information asymmetry. Would’ve been different if there were way more miners from the beginning
- do_not_redeem 2y agoEvery human endeavor since the beginning of history has had some form of information asymmetry. Not everyone can be lucky enough to buy AAPL in 2001 or BTC in 2009. Apple management and Satoshi both announced what they were doing publicly to anyone who would listen, but not everyone was listening. Unless you can conjure up a method to deliver every piece of information globally to everyone on earth instantaneously, you'll just have to accept that as a fact of life. It's not bitcoin's problem to solve. Complaining on the internet about how life is unfair certainly won't solve it.
- oa335 2y ago> Bitcoin is the useless asset since it's proven that productive assets (think stocks) are better store of values than unproductive ones (think gold). This has hardly been proven. Gold has been recognized as source of value across several millennia and multiple cultures. I would bet that 1000 years from now gold will still have value, whereas stocks are only valuable in as much as the rights that they represent can be enforced by a court and implicitly the state backing it.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoWe are <one mile-sized asteroid made of gold> away from gold losing all its value. One such asteroid has been discovered already. It's called 16 Psyche, 140 miles in diameter and made largely of gold and other precious metals. To compare, all gold ever mined on Earth fits into a 22-meter cube.
- oa335 2y agoWe are one government/imperial collapse from US stocks losing all value. Historically which is more likely to happen?
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoBoth are more likely to happen than Bitcoin being cracked.
- lolc 2y agoHow are you so certain about the composition of 16 Psyche?
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoNASA was confident enough to send a rocket towards it, it is scheduled to reach 16 Psyche in 2029.