1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
|
Return-Path: <voisine@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A1EBB19
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 20:56:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qk0-f169.google.com (mail-qk0-f169.google.com
[209.85.220.169])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30781BE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 20:56:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qkeo142 with SMTP id o142so85115352qke.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type; bh=bA3RJ2754ys28CsxDcdLkGyoMwppXDZZhRwtWPH8I14=;
b=nuJJhfk06jA7fGVj3Nl2t4VV5IKcMfyscoSU/QqEy8tWxQnanG+SuWAjki8wVGAz4y
sAT4rBihoaS9qL7gf+Uvdno94qiqmXLAJF4YTzP5xH5bQMLQbNVu9CntfQ7GNRUuZzEB
Hn1R3H31wOYfALMNM1N1ke5idyUgqDtYX5IYESIrciFRibQkhw1diD4Zc5QXI+c5HNTf
S4bFrHP9/ncYOcrgqQTITG2Xl2778+bZNxGqq6D4tEsQHuduwFSdhrwKUTASjdviWVv6
EjdSGg9FYeXbe75PXZ8XLQYv1d1b1N6n2I7hwbQHSieapp5p+3kMP4aabnlckF42G0tV
z3Ng==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.55.20.16 with SMTP id e16mr24747277qkh.71.1435524981074;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.91.37 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <559022BE.2060503@mail.bihthai.net>
References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
<20150627074259.GA25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
<20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
<558E78CB.7070207@mail.bihthai.net>
<CACq0ZD5WV-J1H7QA0F2wnErXVFJ3MSxWtQidPhVwaxauoHQz_A@mail.gmail.com>
<559022BE.2060503@mail.bihthai.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 13:56:20 -0700
Message-ID: <CACq0ZD5+4f19MCoiDxu8R7oHVki8VnA_f0TdUNGgnyk5PoJ+Mw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail.com>
To: venzen@mail.bihthai.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 20:41:24 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 20:56:22 -0000
--001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Moving the list to BCC, since this isn't really a technical discussion.
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Venzen Khaosan <venzen@mail.bihthai.net>
wrote:
>
> Bitcoin's exchange rate, as a commodity money floating freely in the
> market, will go up and down according to speculative cycles and we
> should conceptually separate its valuation in fiat terms, from its
> fundamental value which is: mathematical consensus, cryptographic
> transaction security and censorship resistance, etc.
I get the feeling we might be reasoning from different underlying
assumptions, but I don't think you can separate value that way. Those
fundamental properties were chosen to serve the goal of creating a digital
commodity money. They are useful only in as much as they serve ends that
people value. Consensus, security, censorship resistance are valuable
because they are desirable properties for money to have.
If you want to argue that the properties of bitcoin are valuable for other
things besides money, that's fine, but those other uses presumably can be
accomplished with tiny amounts of bitcoin, so don't appreciably increase
demand.
> These values are
> critically reliant on Bitcoin's *degree of decentralization* for them
> to remain true and for Bitcoin to retain its meaning, and, therefore,
> its value. That is what I point out when I say "greater adoption has
> not reflected in the price chart". And that may remain the case for
> evermore because the value is in the protocol, the blockchain and its
> utility and degree of decentralization, not in the chart or the size
> of the user base
>
I think it depends on what you mean by "adoption". Adoption as a
store-of-value must necessarily increase the market price given the
restricted and eventually fixed supply. If we're talking about merchant
adoption as a payment system, or increased transaction volume, the yes,
these things have no direct impact on the price. They only impact the price
indirectly in as much as they encourage further adoption as a
store-of-value.
> I argue that we already know what the value of Bitcoin is. In its
> current form Bitcoin most likely fulfills 80% or 90% of its eventual
> fully evolved value. Increased adoption will not strengthen the
> fundamentals, so let's proceed with scaling that will safeguard
> Bitcoin's fundamental value and implement protections that ensure
> quality of decentralization.
>
Increased adoption does strengthen the fundamentals. The most important
fundamental for money is how many other people standardize on the same
money, and want to hold it. This drives it's price in terms of other
commodities. You want to hold what everyone else wants to hold.
Aaron Voisine
co-founder and CEO
breadwallet.com
--001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Moving the list to BCC, since this isn't really a tech=
nical discussion.<div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote">On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Venzen Khaosan <span dir=3D"ltr=
"><<a href=3D"mailto:venzen@mail.bihthai.net" target=3D"_blank">venzen@m=
ail.bihthai.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:r=
gb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>Bitcoin's=
exchange rate, as a commodity money floating freely in the<br>
market, will go up and down according to speculative cycles and we<br>
should conceptually separate its valuation in fiat terms, from its<br>
fundamental value which is: mathematical consensus, cryptographic<br>
transaction security and censorship resistance, etc. </blockquote><div><br>=
</div><div>I get the feeling we might be reasoning from different underlyin=
g assumptions, but I don't think you can separate value that way. Those=
fundamental properties were chosen to serve the goal of creating a digital=
commodity money. They are useful only in as much as they serve ends that p=
eople value. Consensus, security, censorship resistance are valuable becaus=
e they are desirable properties for money to have.</div><div><br></div><div=
>If you want to argue that the properties of bitcoin are valuable for other=
things besides money, that's fine, but those other uses presumably can=
be accomplished with tiny amounts of bitcoin, so don't appreciably inc=
rease demand.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(20=
4,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">These values are<br>
critically reliant on Bitcoin's *degree of decentralization* for them<b=
r>
to remain true and for Bitcoin to retain its meaning, and, therefore,<br>
its value. That is what I point out when I say "greater adoption has<b=
r>
not reflected in the price chart". And that may remain the case for<br=
>
evermore because the value is in the protocol, the blockchain and its<br>
utility and degree of decentralization, not in the chart or the size<br>
of the user base<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think it depends on =
what you mean by "adoption". Adoption as a store-of-value must ne=
cessarily increase the market price given the restricted and eventually fix=
ed supply. If we're talking about merchant adoption as a payment system=
, or increased transaction volume, the yes, these things have no direct imp=
act on the price. They only impact the price indirectly in as much as they =
encourage further adoption as a store-of-value.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-=
width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;paddin=
g-left:1ex">
I argue that we already know what the value of Bitcoin is. In its<br>
current form Bitcoin most likely fulfills 80% or 90% of its eventual<br>
fully evolved value. Increased adoption will not strengthen the<br>
fundamentals, so let's proceed with scaling that will safeguard<br>
Bitcoin's fundamental value and implement protections that ensure<br>
quality of decentralization.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Increased =
adoption does strengthen the fundamentals. The most important fundamental f=
or money is how many other people standardize on the same money, and want t=
o hold it. This drives it's price in terms of other commodities. You wa=
nt to hold what everyone else wants to hold.</div></div></div><div class=3D=
"gmail_extra"><div><br>Aaron Voisine</div><div>co-founder and CEO<br><a hre=
f=3D"http://breadwallet.com/" target=3D"_blank">breadwallet.com</a></div></=
div></div>
--001a1144d25490316a05199a34cd--
|
