The primary utility of money is this: it is the good that best lends itself to exchanges for other goods.
Its been clear to me for some time now, and I'm not alone in this, that as the properties of Bitcoin have moved further away from its primary function as a useful unit of exchange that its usage would decline.
There are other crypto-currencies which are now much better suited as a medium of exchange, which ones people will prefer as time progresses remain to be seen, but unless Bitcoin takes a major corrective path, I would be quite surprised to find Bitcoin in that final set of widely utilized currencies.
It's more than 21 millions since bitcoins can be divided.
And no, it could serve as a digital gold / long term investment, and others crypto currencies could be used for day to day transaction
What? That's like saying it's okay if there's only 21 million US dollars, they can be divided into pennies.
Bitcoin has no intrinsic value. Gold does. There's no long-term investment there when even pizza places and Steam think the "currency" is bunk.
It's one thing if Goldman Sachs thinks the currency is worthless, but another issue entirely if the digital equivalent of Circle-K won't accept your virtual dollary-doos.
Let's see, would I rather invest in a company like Intel whose processors are in every American home, or McDonalds whose an international brand, or in Bitcoin whose sole usage is relegated to druggies and sole investment limited to grandmas and millennials who think they're going to strike it rich?
I didn't say it was "okay". It was not an argument. The fact that there are max 21 millions bitcoins is known to everybody but doesn't say much about the total supply since it can be divided. And it cannot be divided into infinity, the smallest unit is the satoshi, so why not talk about the max number of satoshis if you want to make an argument about the max supply of unit of currency ?
Given that it’s a pure fiat currency, why would it retain value if it cannot be used as a currency? The early adopters who get rich if enough people buy in want that but that’s a tiny number of people and for everyone else it’s cheaper and easier to use something which actually solves a problem.
Bitcoin can serve as both digital gold and cash. The Lightning Network (a network of bi-directional payment channels) supports instant sub-1-cent micropayments.
It's not like an IOU. They are literally signed (by both parties of the channel) transactions that have yet to be broadcasted and included into blocks. You aren't sending something that is worthless to the counterparty. You both agree what the channel balance is. If there is a disagreement to the state of the channel, the base layer is the ultimate arbiter.
Its been clear to me for some time now, and I'm not alone in this, that as the properties of Bitcoin have moved further away from its primary function as a useful unit of exchange that its usage would decline.
There are other crypto-currencies which are now much better suited as a medium of exchange, which ones people will prefer as time progresses remain to be seen, but unless Bitcoin takes a major corrective path, I would be quite surprised to find Bitcoin in that final set of widely utilized currencies.