Bitcoin Forum

Hello

My short things aboute Crypto Central Banks

Many bitcoin maximalists live in the fantasies of an idealistic theory of bitcoin as a world currency.
But apparently from the lack of education and less understanding of the general structure of the economy, they do not notice how other crypto-currencies become real world digital currencies, and not just means of accumulation and speculation. And it's not just about the technology of long and expensive BTC transactions, the lack of smart contracts, etc.

ETH and BNB are, unlike BTC, realy already used to pay for goods and services, and not only for goods and services in DeFi and NFT, but also in the real world.
And this happens due to the presence in them of the monetary policy inherent in the fiat currencies of the real world, which makes them convenient in terms of the speed of operations, commissions, accrued interest on the deposit ...

Establishing a Crypto Central Banks in the person of CZ or Vitalik (sometimes taking from account the DAO vote, but sometimes despite the misconceptions of mass miners), the price of the commission for the operation, the block speed (by updating the code in the ETH or, for example, limiting the 21 nodes in BNB), this is a standard function of managing economic processes.

The burning or add printing of coins is also a standard function of managing the money supply, and the % rate for staking is practically the same as the refinancing rate of the classical Central Bank, which stimulates the increase in staking deposits during the period of growth of the % staking rate, or vice when % less is stimulates  investing coins in the "means of production" of other projects, for example, on the Binance Launchpad.

The presence of such basic mechanisms for managing monetary policy as an increase or decrease in the money supply and the refinancing (staking) rate, in conjunction with other less popular mechanisms, in the real TOP currencies of crypto-economy, once again confirms the fallacy of the idealistic theory about Bitcoin as a single world currency (which is practically does not take part in the mechanisms of mass payment for goods / services), and retains the value of Bitcoin only as crypto-gold.

At the same time, thanks to the understanding of classical economic processes by CEO`s the market leaders ETH and BNB, using real monetary technologies, they become real world currencies, confirming that the Blockchain is just a new type of database that changes the world in the same way just like Internet, and is not the sacred graal of libertarians.
And Blockchain will change the world using the classic fiat rules of economics and only partially improving their technological application like new database

@aerashow

Actually in the world I'm living in there are few things I could buy with Bitcoin and basically none I could buy with altcoins.

So all I see here is a wall of text with convenient inaccuracies advertising how good your altcoins are.
And if you are so keen for centralization - the thing Bitcoin tries to run away from - you're always free to use your altcoins. But please don't come crying when the central point of failure will break/no longer meet your expectations.

BTC is used to pay for goods. Its even a LEGAL TENDER in 6 mln people country.

https://twitter.com/DocumentingBTC/status/1406664487126642695
"20,000 people in El Salvador 🇸🇻 recently transacted on the #Bitcoin Lightning Network, using the
@Bitcoinbeach
wallet.
All together, their total fees were $4.98. Yes, 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝘁𝗼𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿."


There is no increase in the money supply in BNB. Lauchpads does not increase BNB supply. Staking on binance chain does not increase BNB supply. BNB is deflationary as long as binance is generating profit. You did not make your lessons right MR "But apparently from the lack of education and less understanding of the general structure of the economy"

Bitcoin does not need to be a world currency to be worth to hodl. In fact no decentralized coin will achieve that. And if you want to hold centralized crypto that can be printed/burned according to centralized decisions - go and hold fiats. Dollar lost in value 95% in last 110 years thanks to mechanisms that you love so much.

Because it’s just in the early process of adoption. Wait for El Salvador. It’s a country plugging in in a free and open system as an alternative to Central Banking.


Good for them. Bitcoin is still more secure, and more valuable than them.


If you accept that they are centralized and OK with being centralized, then OK. Bitcoin’s main value proposition is censorship-resistance, therefore security/decentralization must be overshot.


Good for them if they want a cabal, like the Federal Reserve, to decide the supply increase, or decrease. In Bitcoin, it’s in the protocol.

for now the only thing that attracts attention in payment transactions outside of crypto is Bitcoin, and for altcoin  it is still not publicly decided. because of the value resilience and fluctuating altcoin are still not comparable to Bitcoin.
Therefore, it is very difficult for altcoin to enter the realm of financially legal payments.
And it's definitely not possible to accept any of the altcoin  given the freedom to pay for goods. because it will trigger pressure from other altcoin  that force themselves to apply for legal payments that are legal in every country.

therefore, only Bitcoin is enough, and does not apply to altcoin .

It's not "Crypto Central Banks" of VB and CZ. ETH and BNB, are securities. The burn, print more, and whatever, is just like a stock split, buy back, reverse split, issuing more stocks, nothing new. The power of Bitcoin is the competition to validate transactions and produce blocks, thus it's secure. (Not to mention its fair launch).

It's fine if we have CBDC since we will have more options. We can have BTC, CBDC, and others.

There is no future where there is a crypto central bank, crypto is decentralized and that will stay that way. All the ETH is doing is accepted by the public, sure Vitalik could be wanting to move it a direction but if the public doesn't want it then they could very well ignore it.

All that eip 1559 and eth 2.0 where miners will be hurt got a huge amount of disagreement from the miner community, which didn't change the result because everyone else who paid a shit ton of gas fee ignored them, but it got some complaints at least. BNB on the other hand is a centralized currency, they have that BSC which is decentralized, CZ is not doing anything to change that for now but he can anytime he wants, he rules over the whole blockchain with his validators. Long story short these are not proofs of central bank, it is proof of central currency.

Vitalik Buterin & ETH always maintained a partnership with microsoft and big tech who are allies of banking cartels. Bitcoin's retail support can't be compared to ETH. Ethereum receives privileged treatment from retail merchants and the media thanks to their partnerships with MSFT and pandering to bank policy.

The truth is many cryptocurrencies like ETH pander to bank inflationary policy by creating coins with infinitely printable supplies. Those projects get a thumbs up from banks and their allies. While inflation protected deflationary assets like bitcoin usually get a thumbs down. Who can guess at the motives behind it.

Inflation in the US and perhaps around the world is expected to rise. It may be premature to say the central bank devised scheme of money printing is perfect.

Hello

Thanks to everyone for the comments, I will try to answer everyone in a single post:

1. My examples with ETH, BNB are not limited only to them, other altcoins are also often managed, somewhere by the community, somewhere personally (by the council) of the creators, but in any case, this control is similar or similar to the monetary policy of Central Banks. Somewhere the currency has inflation and is trying to fight it (as now in updates code in ETH), somewhere deflation, burning tokens like BNB, somewhere in other ways, but this is a monetary policy, similar, somewhere more, somewhere less, lik monetary policy Central Banks

2. The real use of BTC as a means of payment for mass use is impossible due to long blocks and expensive commission. Nobody will pay even a $ 1 commission for each of the tens of daily payments for real goods / services, in order to pay tens of $ commissions a day. At the same time, taking into account the sometimes increase in cost transaction to $ 100 or more, with massive payments, total commissions per day can exceed a person's monthly income.
It is thanks to the monetary policy of BNB that the commission there costs 0.1-0.6 cents, and ETH also strives for this, by updating the code of "Berlin", "London" and way to PoS. Moreover, the speed of the final Bitcoin blocks of 60 minutes or more is also unacceptable for the real currency of daily mass payments. Only cryptocurrencies with a monetary policy and the ability to regulate the speed of transactions and the price of transactions, as well as the issue of tokens (printing or burning) that can become real currencies, and not just means of accumulation and speculation. And this is already confirmed by the crypto economy, where ETH, BNB, SOL and other currencies are used in the DeFi and NFT market, and if BTC is used, it is only wrapped, similar to the gold "wrapped" in ballances fiat currencies in clasic economy.

3.The given up examples of technical differences between Bitcoin and Altcoins are like the physical difference between Gold and Paper. Yes, Bitcoin has technical differences, both advantages for stability and the low speed and high price of the commission, and it is these technical differences that make it a crypto-gold, and not a currency of mass payments. At the same time, unlike Gold, Bitcoin also has a minimal monetary policy same of the Central Bank, in terms of updating the code by the decentralized community

And the minimal monetary policy BTC (at least in terms of limiting the 21m emission and support for this by those who update the code and adopt it), and the large monetary policy of ETH, BNB and other Alcoins, confirms that the idealistic ideas of libertarians are good for initial popularization, but not acceptable for real MASSMARKET use of world currency.

My post is that noone cannot do without classical monetary rules and economic policy in fiat and in crypto economy.

P.S. Sorry for possible spelling inaccuracies, as English is not my native language.

Because we are so comfortably used to the kind of system we are under right now. It seems we cannot imagine a currency which is totally free from state control. The fiat system is designed in such a way that there are a number of control mechanisms allowed. The state and the central bank inflate and deflate the monetary supply, dictate to a certain extent the currency's value, regulate inflation, and so on. It seems all these are necessary and that a fiat system will fail miserably without them. In all fairness, Bitcoin hasn't yet proven that the opposite could work. We have yet to see a country fully run by a Bitcoin-based economy. We might see one soon.

Corporations, NGOs, Governments, Banks manage themselves all the time with such governance structures. Do you want a corporation to make the monetary policy for you? Giving the example of BNB and CZs scrupulous methods to increase his platform's fee earning just shows that you do not understand the difference between Bitcoin and these other "corporations".

Bullshit. There is LN. It is far better than all the other in terms of scaling as well as decentralization as an L2 system. Go search for"El Zonte Bitcoin beach". Don't repeat uninformed bullshit fed to you by Ethereum and BCS scammer devs and telegrams. I have nothing against ETH. Yet, those pretending that ETH can be a decentralized, sound money are only hell-bent on pumping their bags.

More bullshit. There is no monetary policy. BNB is a centralized coin that runs on Binance's servers. If an online ledger is all you care about, just use your bank for all those transactions. Continue giving the power of your wage and consumption to your central bank, your politicians and your coprorates. That is how the world has always been. Bitcoin fixes that.

Concern appreciated. Yet, take off your lenses and prejudices from holding bags of BSC shitc-tokens and rug-pulls where you and everyone like you hopes to get a 100X before it all crashes down. Bitcoin is not playing that game. It does not have one of those scam devs that newbies pay allegiance to in their TG and Discord just to get in on the next closed door pump and dump scheme.

Bitcoin's monetary policy is its deflationary emission, hard-cap, the community, censorship resistant, commitment to being community driven and constant innovation. That is the only policy it needs. If you still view "monetary policy" from the perspective of a central bank, why are you even into crypto??

every month there is always a newbie with no education and knowledge of the cryptocurrency technology that comes along and starts praising altcoins that anybody else already knows are terrible projects with lots of flaws and no chance in the real world. they always think just because there is a centralized rich company that fully controls a shitcoin then this shitcoin can succeed. but they forget that when it comes to centralization they are not even at the same level as bitcoin. even if there is any competition it is between them and the government issued shitcoins in the future.
in other words in a couple of years when banks and governments start releasing their centralized altcoins, all these shitcoins like ETH, BNB, USDT, ... die in an instant. most probably their first strke is going to be banning all these altcoins.

at the same time since bitcoin is the only decentralized currency that nobody can ban, censor or prevent from being adopted it will continue growing and continue acting as a global currency.

That's true, and I have started to see that where I live, the government is more actively discussing cryptocurrencies in almost all media channels, especially on television, they are intensifying the release of digital banknotes and satirizing existing cryptocurrencies. I was really worried and the discussion resulted in an opposition camp that is us cryptoners who are still against and don't expect the blocking of crypto exchanges in my country.

I will try to answer briefly

1. LN is Bitcoin's CENTRALIZATION technology and is less reliable than ETH or BSC, lets study before criticism!
And the crypto economy REALLY DOES NOT WORK ON BTC, all DeFi and NFT services work on ETH, BNB, SOL ...

2. The manner of writing bitcoins maximalists that Altcoins are a scam, shitcoins, created for pumping up bags, etc., remind the arguments of children of 5 years old with adults that "I don't want to learn, I want to play Lego (Btc)"  ;D

3. If we take decentralized cryptocurrencies, then Monero and ZEC at least have more important functions of real anonymity mixers, unlike BTC, and DASH also has minimal commissions, masternodes, etc.,
So even if there were no real crypto CURRENCIES with monetary policy like ETH and BSC, then anonymous Altcoins would already take power advantage technologically, not BTC.
At the same time, I repeat that any currency is needed precisely for its use in ECNOMY, and not only for speculation, and it was ETH and BSC that were able to create the crypto economy DeFi and NFT, and BTC is used only as a wrapped

4. Yes, we are all worried about bans, restrictions on Binance's activities in Japan, etc. last days, etc. But simply banning BTC, XMR or ETH or BSC may not be enough to keep them out of use.
In the event of a ban, it is anonymous currencies like XMR or ZEC that will take the leadership from BTC in their capitalization. ETH and BSC will simply go to negotiations with the authorities, preserving their real mechanisms by the crypto economies DeFi through an agreement with the authorities.
At the same time, it is also important that only 2-3% of users need anonymity, and 95% need the DeFi crypto economy, and only about 1-3% are Bitcoin maximalists who use now BTC not only for the sake of crypto-gold, namely because of libertarian idealism.

I will try to clarify my position once again, and again I apologize for my possible bad English.

1. I am neither bitcoin maximalist nor minimalist. I compare Bitcoin to Gold, as they both had important functions in the rise of the ancient economies and the primary IT economies.
Their large-scale usege historically developed and since most of them have them in storage, they will hardly be completely rejected, although other metals have technically better characteristics than Gold, but the ability to mine them arose later, therefore, use is less scalable, as well as some altcoins such as XMR, ZEC, DASH have better characteristics, but are less popular since it was Bitcoin that was launched first and most users have it.

2. Gold has some advantages in comparison with paper, it can be divided many times, but the  100 $paper needs to be exchanged for other smaller $papers  first, but it cannot be simply divided.  Gold does not burn, is not afraid (at short times) of water, etc. Still, we do not use Gold for every daily settlements. And not only because of the technical disadvantages such as large weight and large storage volume (like long blocks and expensive transactions like an analogue in BTC), but also because of the lack of monetary policy in Gold, like in Bitcoin. Gold cannot be when it is necessary to sharply "finish printing" during a war, crisis, Covid19 (in order to avoid food riots), it is difficult to manage the refinancing rate in one country, for economic development when gold is international.
That is why, as soon as a stable and reliable technology of fiat money appeared, we used it for many centuries for a real daily economy of consumption of goods and services, as we now use ETH, BSC, SOL for DeFi and NFT. At the same time, just like Gold, Bitcoin, which is in the reserves of many, will always remain a store of value, especially in times of crises.

3. The crisis of 2008 did not happen because of the printing of paper money, but because of the wrong regulation and wrong use of the derivatives market. Blockchain technology, using it in derivatives makes this market more transparent and more regulated, and with the right regulation reduces the risks of a crisis. It does not matter what currency is used, as long as the derivatives market is transparent and properly regulated.

4. People do not like the government, because they do not trust it, because they do not understand its decision-making principles (and yes, they are also not perfect like everything in this world). At the same time, the Blockchain makes it possible to create a DAO, and on the basis of its creation, Crypto Central Bank or DAO-Central Banks. When public DAO-Central Crypto Bantks use classic economic solutions for managing monetary policy (inflation / deflation of tokens, % staking rate and speed of transactions), users will be able to trust such a policy and it will improve the overall economics by combining monteraonic and Blockchain technologies.

5. Yes, the best solution on the principles of voting in the DAO has not yet been found:
*1 when to vote simply by having a wallet,
*2 when we have a quantity of coins, or
*3 when we have real experience in the economy (techology),
but this is a separate topic and also has something to offer on this occasion.
And look the rapid development of the DAO, I think in the next few years such a correct mechanism, combining all these 3 options with different ratios, will be found, tested and accepted by the majority as a trustworthy one not only in managing the monetary policy of tokens, but in managing most of the social processes of society

This post is very long and I advise you make shorter next time.

But are you saying bitcoin is not worth hodling or worthless or something? That BnB and Eth are preferable than bitcoin? No, I don't think you know what a decentralised asset bitcoin is which is a big advantage that you have underestimated.

if you think that I am saying that Bitcoin is not worth HODL, then apparently you should re-read my post  ;)
I'm not talking about this, but I'm talking about the importance of monetary policy mechanisms in crypto-currencies in the real economy,
which are used by ETH, BSC and others, and that BTC is analogous to Gold, not Currency!

Definitely agree.
We already have a lot of centralization currencies and none of them are actually any different from the other. The government and the big investors controll everything and there is not much scope of growth.

I do think that centralizing cryptocurrencies will take away their uniqueness. Centralization means corruption. It's more of so the way general government works. Plus Altcoins are basically not so important on practical basis. I see shops going for ETH for sure but more than that am yet to see. Their growth is also very doubtful therefore they may be good for trading but not for the real world practical applications.

Who told you that bitcoin was created to become a currency? It is for transactions still it may not be for your daily life. If bitcoin is for your day to day life then why it was designed by having gold in mind? So, come out of misconceptions before underestimating the level of education and awareness of bitcoin maximalists.

Crypto central banks will work in a way like it may use bitcoin as a reserve and may not use bitcoin as a momentary unit. At the same time this does not mean bitcoin is going to give room for altcoins to be used as a money because bitcoin-lightning kind of new innovation will do that job as may not be recorded into blockchain for every transaction but may hit blockchain once in a day as it may happen in very less value.

This talk carries a great deal of realism, yes it is true that it is difficult at the present time to adopt Bitcoin as a “united global currency” due to the great problems that the Bitcoin network suffers from in sending transactions, in increasing the size of the block and the large energy consumption in mining, which makes costs high, fees high and delay At the time of sending the transaction, it is not possible to complete a transaction to buy some widgets from the supermarket because this may take several hours and perhaps several days, there are of course many attempts to solve these problems such as the Bitcoin lightning network for example but these attempts are still futile as well.
Despite all this, I am optimistic about the future of Bitcoin and I believe that appropriate solutions will be found in the near future and I still have a strong belief that Bitcoin is the currency of the future.

I would not be so optimistic about bitcoin as the currency of the future, because there are many pitfalls that have hindered and will continue to hinder the functioning of bitcoin as a currency. I am benevolent and optimistic about the prospects of bitcoin itself in the future and I hope that nothing threatens this and I hope that the value and market prospects will only grow and improve. It's just that currencies are a rather delicate topic and states are unlikely to allow decentralization and chaos in this topic and will rather come up with their own version of an international centralized cryptocurrency.

Yeah, the reason why there is always an alternative is so that when some people decide they don’t like the real one, they can go for the alternative. But just know that alternatives can hardly be as good as the original. I do know that there are good altcoins, but a lot of them, from what I have noticed are centralized.

Just look at Bitcoin for example, there is no central point that controls it, it is completely decentralized and not being controlled by anyone, but most of these altcoins has a place of control. So that means that they are not fully decentralized, though they might claim to be that.

I'm about the furthest thing to a bitcoin maximalist, but I find it incredibly hard to believe that ETH or BNB have a higher utility for actual commerce in the real world.  In reality, no cryptocurrency is currently particularly useful as a currency because of the volatility that plagues them all, but of those extremely limited use cases where crypto is used for commerce, I have to believe the Bitcoin is the preferred medium of exchange, even though technologically it's far from ideal and there are many better mediums of transfer in the crypto space.

That is true, no one is denying that on-chain transactions are not really the best if you want to buy something which requires a fast confirmation, however thanks to El Salvador making bitcoin legal tender and the lightning network we will see how this turns out.

If the experiment is a success and people begin to use bitcoin all over the country as a currency then we could see other countries doing the same and bitcoin finally becoming what satoshi envisioned from the beginning, a currency.

Well you’re right about altcoins, they have a faster transaction and are also cheaper when compared to what you have to pay for using Bitcoin. But that doesn’t mean that bitcoin is not a good option too. And of course we have all hoped for a solution to the problem that we have with Bitcoin, but none has arrived yet to serve as a final solution to issues like this. Even at that, there are still a lot of people that are making use of bitcoin for transaction, more than there are those who are using altcoins.

I hardly find anyone that is using altcoins for transactions where I am, it’s only Bitcoin that people are using. So that means Bitcoin still has an edge over other cryptocurrencies.

Thank you all for the comments !
Without entering into a long debate, I will answer in essence.

Unlike many apparently theorists here, I actually pay for real goods / services quite often, just like my friends do it and NOBODY pays for coffee in BTC, but we pay in BNB and based on ETH tokens! Expensive fees and transaction time of 60 minutes does not allow using BTC as a real currency of payments, but a means of savings.

If someone knows which retail outlets in large quantities, and not singly, accept many daily payments in BTC, send a link to their wallet please, to see the massiveness of transactions, please, but I know that no one accepts BTC in large quantities, due to technical inconveniences

And now another good example is that even the relocation of miners from one country, China, has already made 50,000 transactions pending for more than 24 hours! Nobody will wait for payment for real goods / services for more than 24 hours sitting at the checkout!

But my post is not about the inconvenient technical characteristics of BTC for a real currency of mass payments, but about already implementation of monetary policy with real currencies, such as ETH and BNB, by analogy with the monetary policy of the Central Banks of the offline world.

Dear guy, if you want standard monetary policies and tools that allow standard monetary policies why would you need anything like Ethereum, BNB or any crypto? You already have fiat and ordinary central banks for that. Bitcoin is for people who precisely do not want anything to do with what you call standard monetary policy, because that policy and system is based on inflation, monopoly money, banks that hold an undue influence in the economy and politicians who cannot think beyond their electoral period.

Why would you need to replicate that, it is already there.

Bitcoin is already a global currency and it is perfectly fine sharing the space with traditional fiat. It does not need to be officially recognised, because we ("we the people") have already decided to accept it.

Bitcoin is, as of now, not intended to pay for coffee. Nor are 500 euro bills. However it is perfect for mid-large transactions and carries less fees and is faster than international transfers, but, above all, is not controlled by any third entity in the process.

BNB is a private currency. ETH in inflationary. Please, hold as much as you want and buy as much coffee as you want with it. You have earned it.

Thanks for the answer, guy
1. I understand your idealistic views and share in the part that BTC is suitable for large transactions. But the mass economy is made up of billions of small transactions that require real cryptocurrencies with monetary policy and fast, cheap transactions, etc. At the same time, even large buyers are not always ready to wait for their turn in 50,000 transactions, and this is a big risk.
2. DeFi, as a real crypto economy, does not even use BTC (except for the wrapped) and this once again proves that BTC is not a currency, but a prototype of a currency and a store of value, and not daily payments.
3. What exactly are crypto currencies for and their difference from fiat currencies I think it will become clear to you if you study the principle of the blockchain, its openness of the database and the possibility of building DeFi, DEX, NFT and other systems on them.
4. I am not trying to downplay the importance of BTC in the formation and popularization of the crypto economy, but I am trying to look to the future and see the prospects for the currencies of a really massive crypto economy and their monetary policy. The use of such currencies does not contradict the use of BTC in some rare cases of large transactions and extreme libertarians

Just because you write a lot of things doesn't mean it's worth the 3 seconds you spent developing the thought process behind it.  Bitcoin can be used for tons of transactions.  I don't know where you live but I can't buy nothing with bnb before I would have to transfer it into btc first.  Passing this off as nothing more than a troll post.