Hi, thank you all once again for responses.
Conclusions as theses from several answers:
1. BTC took the role of USD in relation to the 'real' world
2. I would risk a thesis that if pt 1 is true - then the
network is a central bank, while
BTC is it's payment instrument3. Yes, central banks operate basing on interests and money production, as well as lending. In such relation, while there is no 'single mining' took the role
nodes.I would risk a thesis that if the 'interest' rate is established due to the inflation mechanism, fees for transactions are like loan interests of the central bank
4. Stabilization role of BTC in relation to alts and tokens - there was a good comparison to commodities. BTC is a common good, while the rest is derivatives. It all depends on market cap, maybe this role will be changed by the other currency?
5. Yes, BTC i decentralized, however I would risk a thesis that the whole network is a centralization process thinking about nodes only (nothing can be done without blockchain notification), so it is not so independent
Theses are
contradictory, as I would like to compare the stabilizing role of BTC to the classical market, which also changes due to internet banking (money becomes more and more a virtual thing). This is really a hard discussion, as it seems there a lot of common and coherent characteristics, while the original decentralization assumption predominates.
Edit: look at the number of nodes:
https://bitnodes.21.co/dashboard/?days=365 vs. the thesis where 'transaction fees' state a 'loan' of the 'banks' <=> nodes.