Tether is a stable coin and will follow Fiat every time so it's normal to have an infinite number.

Once there is mass adoption I believe we will all have to register our wallet addresses with some authority or another.

 

Shoot they already got 90% of us

 

That is called a 'misnomer' They don't actually 'print' anything ... they simply flip some bits on a server (I believe this is how credit cards work too) ... the big difference is, they own/control that centralized server/system, and the value/worth of those bits is decided behind closed doors ... its not something that can run on your or my computer ... its also not something that the collecive 'us' can decide upon the value of ...

Anyhoo...

 

Governments (the US at least) issue debt in a currency they create from nothing. It's mind blowing when you think about it. How did that happen? By going off the gold standard, brilliant (but no longer shiny)...

 

You have just summarised 97% owned. Its mind blowing that only 3% of all money is real cash, the rest is a debit and credit ledger in the central bank that gets deleted once the retail bank has had its loan repaid by us with interest. The retail bank keeps the interest and the central bank just deletes the transaction with the retail bank.

 

Not so. If that were true, there would never be any incidents of hyperinflation.

 

Totally so

Edit : if my currency is banana's, then yes, the goverments bit-flipping makes my banana worth 'more' ... but that is also regulated by the same people no? Not 'us'.

 

Dogecoin, Etherium, Polkadot and Solana just to name a few of the more well known ones also have theoretically infinite supply. I'm not saying it's in their best interest to release more but they could. Hmm, just like fiat?

If crypto regulation matures then it makes sense that wallets will have to be registered and some level of KYC (Know Your Client) will need to be conducted but we're not there yet, hence saying that crypto is more transparent doesn't really hold water. Sure, it's more transparent in that everyone can see the transactions but so what? Financial institutions could do the same with anonymized data but what would it actually show? ID123 moved £3mil today to ID865? With inside data you could figure out what was happening but for the general masses, largely meaningless.

Then there's volume which blockchains currently cannot handle. Most are aware of the retail numbers produced by VISA, Mastercard, etc. but what isn't common knowledge is the volume conducted by corporations and increasingly, FinTechs which encapsulate a lot of payment service providers.

But crypto can be used for cheap cross border settlements right? Yes, but that is post clearing at a corporate level which has a byproduct of obfuscating the participants so there goes transparency in the blockchain.

 

Your graphic is an overly simplistic definition of hyperinflation.

Again:

The "value" of a currency is not decided by any cabal behind closed doors. There are many variables that impact their values, both internal and external. Ultimately, a widespread loss of confidence in a currency is its death knell, and, contrary to your assertion, is an illustration of the collective masses deciding on its value.

Central banks can control the money supply, but the value of the currencies, not so much. Influence? Yes. Control? No.

 

I see this transparency argument made all the time, but if it was truly transparent, criminals wouldn't use it for ransomware attacks, etc. Now cue someone who will jump in and say that fiat is the most used currency for criminal activities. Yes, of course that's true, but also fiat is used for more of everything than crypto is.

But that whole thing is just a distraction from the real issue here...the claim of transparency that really isn't there...

 

I also don't have confidence in the statistics that are published or how they are sometimes misquoted. In a known scam were people (sadly often the elderly and less educated) are tricked into sending gift cards or certificates which are then converted to crypto and then back to fiat. How is this represented in the statistics? This scam and how they convert the ill gotten gains is well documented on YouTube.

You've hit the nail on the head about proportion as well. A more interesting statistic which I don't have on hand is what proportion in value of fiat and crypto is used for illegal activities?

 

It sure is. Not all of us are scholars of complexity

Back on track to the only point I was actually making : they do control the bit flipping aka 'the supply', which does not exist anywhere else but in zeros and ones, contrary to the belief of so many, which is pretty much exactly the same as crypto currency (except, decentralization/limited supply etc etc yadda yadda).

 

Sorry if you think that I am being pedantic, but you said that the "value/worth of those bits is decided behind closed doors", which is very different from the amount of money being produced.

 

Its normally its at this point in the conversation between strangers on the internet where its best to just keep quite, and let things pass, however, I have observed a pattern on threads that involve economics on numerous occasions (as a 3rd party...and quite honestly its the last thing I could care to follow), and I am certain you are a nice guy who simply can't help himself at times, and so I ask an honest question : has it never occurred to you to ask yourself why there is a recurring pattern in these scenarios?

(no no you not telepathic, you have no idea what I am thinking, which is all good Question is rehtoric, so feel free to reach out via PM!)

 

l made a criticism of a mistake that you made, which you repeatedly attempted to rationalize, and because I persisted in pointing out the mistake, my behavior now becomes a topic of discussion?

hoo boy

 

Much more crime is committed with guns, rockets, tanks and chemicals than Bitcoin.

 

As an English chap I tend to say…. Well things could be a lot worse…. The trouble is and then they are ;0)
I guess it seems every Crypto cloud has a Silvergate lining…… CBDC to the rescue at some point perhaps once we have been softened up enough….

 

Please all remember, Bitcoin is fundamentally different from “Cryptocurrencies”. To discuss them as though they have the same characteristics and influences will result in serious false conclusions.

Further, CBDC’s are not the same as “Cryptocurrencies”

Central Bank Digital Currencies are more scary to me that another medical intervention, and will fundamentally change our society in ways that speculation has only just scratched the surface of.

this is my understanding so far, and yes I am a bitcoin maximalist so bear that in mind, as well as I could be wrong.

Bitcoin is the only widespread trust-less, decentralised ledger. (No leaders, only consensus)

Cryptocurrencies, (including ether) have centralised control, with large “pre-mines” giving tokens and influence to creators. Proof of stake has pushed any tokens that use it further away from decentralised governance.

Central Bank Digital Currencies are not really crypto currencies, rather they are digital versions of what we already have - but a CBDC will allow whoever controls it to control and scrutinise every last penny - they will see who it goes to, have the ability to control who can use it, when, on what, and withdraw peoples use of it instantly.

On one hand we have Bitcoin, a democratic trust-less unit of account, and CBDC’s, a totalitarian control system.

because it’s all so new, many do not understand this fundamentally Good vs Evil situation

 

I continue to hold Bitcoin largely based on this exact reasoning. That said, I was quite surprised to read this from an article in the WSJ recently:

“…Mr. Chow is one of a handful of people who can write changes into the software that underpins the nearly $500 billion cryptocurrency. Their role is critical to bitcoin, yet is largely unknown to the millions who own it.

Known as maintainers, he and four other coders serve as stewards of Bitcoin Core, an open-source program that keeps the cryptocurrency’s digital ledger up-to-date on thousands of computers that make up its network. Their longtime leader departed Thursday, reducing the group’s size to five from six.”

You can read the full article here. https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-core-maintainers-crypto-7b93804

Curious what others think of this, as it suggests that while BTC may be decentralized, it is rather dependent on software maintenance from a handful of individuals whose selection, responsibilities, qualifications and potential conflicts of interest are all rather opaque.