avatarKeith Parkins

Summary

The article critically assesses Bitcoin as a failed currency experiment, highlighting its volatility, lack of utility, and the speculative nature of its market, while comparing it unfavorably to gold and other traditional currencies.

Abstract

The author of the article, "Bitcoin: The Emperor’s New Clothes," argues that Bitcoin, despite its initial promise as a decentralized digital currency, has not lived up to its potential as a viable form of money. The article points out that Bitcoin's value is too volatile to be useful as a currency for everyday transactions, and its primary use has become a speculative asset rather than a medium of exchange. The comparison with gold underscores Bitcoin's lack of intrinsic value and utility, as gold has practical applications and serves as a stable store of value. The article also criticizes the Bitcoin community and developers for their internal conflicts and the failure to maintain a stable value relative to traditional currencies. Furthermore, the author notes that Bitcoin's promise of egalitarianism has been undermined by the energy-intensive mining process and the concentration of wealth among early adopters. The article suggests that Bitcoin's blockchain technology may have future applications, but as a currency, it is seen as fundamentally flawed.

Opinions

  • Bitcoin is considered useless as a currency due to its extreme volatility and lack of acceptance for everyday transactions.
  • The article equates Bitcoin's rise to a speculative bubble, driven by commodity traders and lacking the stability required of a currency.
  • Bitcoin's comparison to gold is seen as false, with gold having real utility and serving as a reliable store of value, unlike Bitcoin.
  • The author views the Bitcoin community as self-serving, with developers and early adopters having vested interests that are not aligned with the collaborative commons.
  • The article suggests that Bitcoin has failed to prevent hoarding, unlike medieval currency systems that periodically recalled and reissued coins to encourage circulation.
  • The author believes that Bitcoin's blockchain technology has potential uses, but the currency itself has not succeeded as an internet currency.
  • The article criticizes Bitcoin mining for being energy-intensive and favoring the wealthy, thus failing to uphold the egalitarian principles it was founded on.
  • Technical problems and infighting among Bitcoin developers are seen as further evidence of its unsustainable nature.
  • The author proposes that Bitcoin should have maintained parity with traditional currencies or valued

Bitcoin: The Emperor’s New Clothes

Bitcoin was an interesting proof of concept, but little more. It is useless as a currency.

bitcoins

Yesterday, someone cited bitcoin to dollar rate, as though that somehow justified its existence. It was somewhere around $400 if I recall correctly. As I write, $381.41. If I look again, it will have changed.

Bitcoin started at a low of 1,309 bitcoins to the dollar. December 2009 it had slumped to 1,630 bitcoins to the dollar. November 2013 bitcoin reached a high of $1,242.

What was special about 2013?

Banking crisis in Cyprus, banks closed their doors, EU stole money from accounts in excess of 100,000 euros, credit system was shut down, a trial run for Greece two year later, panic set in. Bitcoin offered a quick and dirty means to transfer money out of euros, out of Cyprus.

And herein lies the problem, Bitcoin has become a commodity for speculators and spivs. It lacks utility as a currency. It is too volatile, and nowhere accepts bitcoin. Can I buy a loaf of bread? No. Marie Antoinette lost her head when the peasants could not buy bread.

Bitcoin is often compared with gold. The comparison is false, a better comparison would be with fool’s gold.

Gold is real, it has utility.

Gold has value because it is easily convertible to dollars. It is not the other way around, dollar has value because it is convertible to gold.

Ever tried carrying around an ingot of gold, scraping off a few slivers to buy a loaf of bread?

Gold has utility. It is used in jewellery, used in electronics.

Gold is immutable, a sack of grain deteriorates.

A currency that deteriorates (note: not the same as inflation), prevents hoarding.

Medieval kings would recall the currency, issue new coins, you received less than you handed in. This was to discourage hoarding. Dead currency is of use to no one, it is not being put to work in the economy.

Those working on bitcoin, all have a vested interested, backed by vulture capitalists, work for parasitical start ups that seek to make money out of bitcoin. This is not the mindset for working in the collaborative commons.

Contributors may contribute garbage to Wikipedia, but at least they do so without expecting any pecuniary reward.

The Bitcoin mindset it also that of religious zealots. Excommunication for heresy. What next, public beheadings, hack and theft of bitcoins, annihilation in the artificial Bitcoin world?

Gold has utility, is immutable. Bitcoin is neither. What happens when the network shuts down?

The parasitical add on are not trustworthy. Many have proved to be scams.

One of the big mistakes with bitcoin was not to maintain parity with the dollar or euro, or maybe a basket of things we value, acreage of old growth forests, extent of marine reserves, carbon in the atmosphere.

Any currency depends entirety upon societal acceptance.

On a remote Pacific Island are large stone rings with holes through the middle called yaps. Some lie at the bottom of the sea. Everyone knows their value, who owns them. The stones never move, only the ownership changes, the accounting is maintained orally.

Bitcoin is coherent noise.

Bitcoin was meant to be egalitarian. It is anything but. The early adopters were able to mint millions (mine in the Bitcoin jargon). Now it requires powerful, energy hungry computers. Far from being egalitarian, bitcoin is heavily skewed to favour the wealthy.

Added to all these problems, there are now technical problems with the blockchain and the developers are involved in internecine warfare.

Had anyone known Lehman Brothers was about to implode, they would have withdrawn their investment.

With Bitcoin imploding, time to dump bitcoins whilst they still have some residual value, transfer to faircoin, where there is governance.

Bitcoin was an interesting proof of concept, but little more. It is useless as a currency. The best that can be said of bitcoin is that it functions as a quick and dirty method to transfer out of a currency, across borders and into another currency. Its hopes of becoming an internet currency have not succeeded.

Faircoin, which can be seen as BitCoin 2.0, attempts to address some of the problems associated with bitcoin.

The blockchain may find uses, as we have seen with Mycelia to track music.

Bitcoin
Blockchain
Cryptocurrency
Recommended from ReadMedium