this should be the real headline. I am certain and beyond any doubt that I speak for all of us hackernews readers when I say that I have no frame of reference on the value of cryptocurrencies without comparing first with the Malaysian Ringgit
In case you intentionally left out the /s at the end of your comment...
You'd be surprised how advanced the banking systems are in some 3rd world countries. In many cases the banks skipped over a lot of the legacy cruft that 1st world countries are struggling to get rid of now.
Also, in countries where the banking system or currency is falling apart, they use USD cash. Zimbabwe is doing this, Argentina is doing this, I'm sure more places also do this.
Also also, often where you have crumbling banking or currency, you also have crumbling internet and/or electricity infrastructure. Nobody is sitting on an upturned milk crate in their dilapidated corrugated iron shack in the middle of a slum fucking trading bitcoin on Coinbase so that they can buy bread.
Bitcoin is 99% used as a speculative investment instrument and as a means to participate in illicit markets (drugs etc). There is nothing altruistic or democratising about it.
I'd bet the biggest use case is scamming/extorting people. It has been the fastest growing use case, it must move more money than all other use cases combined.
I mean a lot of people speculate that BTC is going up due to Trump's policies and promises, but an equally logical reason is that people expect the fall of USD. Currencies tend to fall after heated elections anywhere.
USD/EUR isn't necessarily a good reference either because they could be headed the same direction - an aggressive POTUS could be viewed as bad for NATO. Even gold, because that gold is going somewhere physical.
But there's not much other evidence that the USD is weakening after the election.
That's simply untrue. There's been constant swings in valuation of around 20x recorded through the past 3000+ years (and decent evidence this also happened before that).
Pretty much all of recorded history is local govts trying to fix the price of gold to remove this instability, and in pretty much every case those govts had to abandoned the fix as actual market values caused local mints to implode.
There's ample research available on google scholar covering all of these points.
This is one of those things that people say as though it's a good thing, but since precious metals are a negative carry asset (ie it costs money to store and insure gold or silver) this means that when you take compounding into effect they have been responsible for a devastating destruction in wealth over that time. Even more so if you consider the opportunity cost of holding metals when you could be holding a productive asset.
cr125rider|1 year ago
beAbU|1 year ago
You'd be surprised how advanced the banking systems are in some 3rd world countries. In many cases the banks skipped over a lot of the legacy cruft that 1st world countries are struggling to get rid of now.
Also, in countries where the banking system or currency is falling apart, they use USD cash. Zimbabwe is doing this, Argentina is doing this, I'm sure more places also do this.
Also also, often where you have crumbling banking or currency, you also have crumbling internet and/or electricity infrastructure. Nobody is sitting on an upturned milk crate in their dilapidated corrugated iron shack in the middle of a slum fucking trading bitcoin on Coinbase so that they can buy bread.
Bitcoin is 99% used as a speculative investment instrument and as a means to participate in illicit markets (drugs etc). There is nothing altruistic or democratising about it.
ASalazarMX|1 year ago
microtherion|1 year ago
1 Ringgit = 1 Ringgit
muzani|1 year ago
USD/EUR isn't necessarily a good reference either because they could be headed the same direction - an aggressive POTUS could be viewed as bad for NATO. Even gold, because that gold is going somewhere physical.
But there's not much other evidence that the USD is weakening after the election.
486sx33|1 year ago
joemazerino|1 year ago
throw2738489|1 year ago
itsoktocry|1 year ago
You have to show your work, without to resorting to "one ounce of gold buys a nice suit" kind of stuff.
SideQuark|1 year ago
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-archaeolog...
Pretty much all of recorded history is local govts trying to fix the price of gold to remove this instability, and in pretty much every case those govts had to abandoned the fix as actual market values caused local mints to implode.
There's ample research available on google scholar covering all of these points.
seanhunter|1 year ago