[pixie_]

Mineable crypto is not fiat because it cannot be created or destroyed at will. That is what gives it value over a fiat currency. You don't have to worry about a central government devaluing it or inflating it artificially.

[richmarr]

I see your point, you're tying "fiat" to the act of spontaneous creation at will rather than the lack of a backing commodity, but I don't agree that definition, and even if I did I'm not sure it's as cast-iron a distinction as you're implying.

You absolutely do have to worry about price manipulation... the only difference is that it's not specifically governments it's just the disproportionately wealthy. I don't see that as a worthwhile distinction.

https://venturebeat.com/2017/12/14/how-bots-are-manipulating...

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-06/mysterious-trader-...

https://cointelegraph.com/news/single-trader-with-enormous-b...

Similarly you can destroy cryptocurrency (some at least), and it can be created. The fact that the creation rate is constrained by the prudence of an algorithm designer rather than constrained by the prudence of a central banker seems like another arbitrary distinction.

To me it feels like crypto proponents want a fancy economics term for othering conventional currencies, so the definition is being bent to fit.

[pixie_]

History has shown us that relying 'prudence of a central banker' is a really bad idea. Eventually shit hits the fan and they go on a spree printing money. The huge advance crypto has brought us is a solution to this very problem.

[imtringued]

You now only have to worry about your "currency" crashing by more than 40% overnight.

[pixie_]

Keep in mind relatively we're still in the early days of crypto. Though it's not like fiat currencies are immune to crashes. Look at history.