What kind of book is this?

[Oshosondy]

The bitcoin part of the book.

The remarks come in response to a passage in Professor Lawrence H. White’s book, “Better Money: Gold, Fiat, or Bitcoin?,” which argued that Bitcoin’s fixed supply makes it too volatile to serve as a medium of exchange.

But Saifedean Ammous, the author of the 2018 academic book “The Bitcoin Standard,” said that Bitcoin already functions as a medium of exchange and that volatility’s effect on that is likely to diminish.

So that was the remark of Saifedean Ammous in response to bitcoin volatility because of it fixed supply whatever.

Bitcoin will become ‘less volatile’ and larger than gold: ‘The Bitcoin Standard’ author

Is Professor Lawrence saying he does not know that bitcoin volatility is reducing or he prefer something similar to fiat in making which will be centralized and be subjected to price control by the central authority.

[EarnOnVictor]

The remarks come in response to a passage in Professor Lawrence H. White’s book, “Better Money: Gold, Fiat, or Bitcoin?,” which argued that Bitcoin’s fixed supply makes it too volatile to serve as a medium of exchange.

But Saifedean Ammous, the author of the 2018 academic book “The Bitcoin Standard,” said that Bitcoin already functions as a medium of exchange and that volatility’s effect on that is likely to diminish.

So that was the remark of Saifedean Ammous in response to bitcoin volatility because of it fixed supply whatever.

I've not read what they both said in details, but with the little you've shared, I could deduce some realities in both of them, even though they might not explain them to understanding of most people.

From Professor Lawrence H. White, I believe he meant the plausibilty of an aggravated demand-induced volatility that would be primarily caused by the inherent fixed supply of Bitcoin. By medium of exchange, he might not necessarily mean the lack of exchange, but the elaborate one where most people would focus on Bitcoin. If happened, the volatility would be chaotic.

From Saifedean Ammous, his own view is not a direct link to Professor Lawrence H's remark. I believe he is staying the present reality of Bitcoin, and also hinted on what could happen in the future if it continues this way. The "diminishing" speculation is not new, as it has been speculated by different important personalities, and some have been discussed on the forum.

[Sammysmart001]

Is Professor Lawrence saying he does not know that bitcoin volatility is reducing or he prefer something similar to fiat in making which will be centralized and be subjected to price control by the central authority.

I would say that professor White is obviously looking at Bitcoin through the eye of a traditional economics, this is because a lot of old school economists do believe that a good currency do needs an elastic supply.

Which means that a central bank can simple print more money for able to keep prices stable. Cause bitcoin supply is fixed at 21 million so for daily use they assume it going to be always too volatile.
And also about the future Ammous is obviously right. Cause if you check as Bitcoin total market cap grows you see that it takes more money to move price. Stability will come naturally over time with that massive size.

If you should ask me from my own view, Professor White is not necessarily pushing for fiat control rather he’s using old fiat rules to judge a completely new type of money

[Die_empty]

Is Professor Lawrence saying he does not know that bitcoin volatility is reducing or he prefer something similar to fiat in making which will be centralized and be subjected to price control by the central authority.

Both authors' views are debatable. Governments use monetary policy to control the flow of money in the economy. The government could decide to print money to match the growing demand for currency as an economy expands, or inject liquidity during severe economic downturns. This would help to reduce currency volatility.

In the case of Bitcoin, the price is driven by demand and supply. Since the supply is fixed, high demand would always increase the value, and vice versa. But Professor Lawrence H. White failed to consider the implications of printing money and how it affects the economy negatively.

Saifedean Ammous is also correct because Bitcoin is gradually becoming less volatile. It is assumed that as it matures, Bitcoin might become less manipulative. It would not respond sharply to political or economic factors.

[Agbamoni]

But Saifedean Ammous, the author of the 2018 academic book “The Bitcoin Standard,” said that Bitcoin already functions as a medium of exchange and that volatility’s effect on that is likely to diminish.

Saifedean Ammous is right about Bitcoin already in use for exchange between physical business owners, B2B, B2C, and P2P.

For Bitcoin to remain a medium of exchange, its volatility needs to keep reducing. But if it keeps reducing, Bitcoin would be less profitable for day traders.



This is the volatility difference from 2018 to date. If the volatility continues to reduce, nobody will use Bitcoin's volatility as an excuse for Bitcoin not to be used as a medium of exchange. Estimating a 20% reduction in the next 10 years.

[Zoomic]

From what I understand, I'll say both Professor Lawrence H. White and Saifedean Ammous have their respective reasonable points just that they're looking Bitcoin from a different point of view.

Even if Bitcoin has a fixed supply, it doesn't mean that the price will be stable since it'll still depend on the level of demand and when demand changes sharply, volatility will still naturally take effect.

That said, we are likely to see Bitcoin grow to the level of less dramatic price movement overtime as adoption and the market becomes more mature.

[Charles-Tim]

From what I understand, I'll say both Professor Lawrence H. White and Saifedean Ammous have their respective reasonable points just that they're looking Bitcoin from a different point of view.

I do not think Professor Lawrence H. White has a point than he is misleading people. I think what he meant is that if the price of bitcoin is increasing, the supply can be increased so that the price increase will not be noticeable. Also if bitcoin price is reducing, the supply can be reduced so that the reduction in price will not be noticeable. I do not know how that can work in a decentralized way.

[JiiBs]

“Better Money: Gold, Fiat, or Bitcoin?,” which argued that Bitcoin’s fixed supply makes it too volatile to serve as a medium of exchange.

But Saifedean Ammous, the author of the 2018 academic book “The Bitcoin Standard,” said that Bitcoin already functions as a medium of exchange and that volatility’s effect on that is likely to diminish.

I think the horn of them are right, volatility might have reduced but do we think it would ever go away? I doubt that. I don’t think we would have Bitcoin without volatility given its fixed supply. Population rice, the presence of fiat and the fact that their would always be those that would hold rather than spend it like regular currency would always mean, the currency would be scare, leaving the populace to manage just a couple of the coin in circulation and there comes the price fluctuation.

[GeorgeJohn]

The two authors is writing based on their imagination or exaggeration..That's clear that so many people will give different theories about bitcoin, so it's based on how they understood the functionalities and the lifespan of bitcoin that prompte them to come up with theory...When looking at the both explanations, you will notice it's partial contradictory...For me the one of professor Lawrence H, is contradictory, everything he said about bitcoin...Actually, I will consider their points of view as a speculation, which we i can consider to be on hypothesis..