Why Do People Believe Bitcoin Will Replace Fiat?

[EndlessStory]

Fiat replacement will be the idea of the future and it will not be implemented in next 50 years.

[1714467350]

1714467350

[1714467350]

1714467350

[QuestionAuthority]

Fiat replacement will be the idea of the future and it will not be implemented in next 50 years.

As a financial tool it's been implemented already regardless of whether or not it's ready for prime time. People like to call Bitcoin an experiment but if that were true it should have been left in the lab instead of risking the money of the world on it and letting the market cap get this big. Bitcoin will never have the ability to replace fiat because government controlled money (paper, gold, sliver or donkeys) is about power not exchange. They might create a copycat that they can fake out the great beast into believing is the same thing but they will never adopt a truly free and open system that they can't control. I think it would almost take WWIII and the overthrow of the USA for Bitcoin to ever replace fiat.

[Beliathon]

Maybe they wont need to use guns in the future and will just have advanced spyware or super computers that can crack encryptions etc.

Hah. Not likely.

[Mars not Moon]

Bitcoin will not be replacing Fiat for another few years. Because bitcoin is not so popular buddy

[Lauda]

Maybe they wont need to use guns in the future and will just have advanced spyware or super computers that can crack encryptions etc.

Hah. Not likely.

It probably won't ever be possible. At least not in our/your lifespan, so why should one care?
Let the people of the future decide how to proceed if it ever happens.
What's the point of encryption if it's going to be cracked in the next 5-10 years?

Bitcoin will not be replacing Fiat for another few years. Because people are ignorant and "sheep".

FTFY.

[jbreher]

Bitcoin is neutral , but at a protocol level has many characteristics which are anarchistic and facilitate anarchism.

This is true only in so much as we've been conditioned in an environment where our pre-existing currency systems are ideally suited for the propagation and maintenance of violent authoritarianism. Bitcoin appears anarchistic by comparing and contrasting it against fiat.

[jbreher]

This Brock Pierce guy TBF member came up with Realcoin because he sees a problem with Bitcoin adoption and wants a solution.

Has he? I've seen an announcement about Realcoin. It is purported to to be a cryptocurrency that is controlled in lockstep with the US Dollar. Tell me - exactly how is this to be accomplished? I may be dumb, but I don't see any way that anything that we think of as a cryptocurrency can be pegged to something under control of a central bank. Can't be done.

Maybe Pierce has a viable scheme. I don't think he does. I think he's lying. I think he is just trying to attract fantastic sums of VC money with which he can live large -- just like every other failed business in which he has been involved so far.

[jbreher]

Tell me if this is one of the fixes that's about to be released or if it one of the not so serious ones.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=758927.0

I happen to think this is a pretty serious drawback for adoption.

One of the not so serious ones.

Most people understand that attempting to buy a single stick of gum at 7-11 with a $100.00 bill will incur some delay while the metered change machine disgorges ten and twenty spots at a slow rate. Accordingly, most people desiring a speedy transaction will ensure they make change before making the tiny purchase at 7-11.

Personally, having a wallet that contains only a single address (actually unspent output) seems rather astonishing to me. Accordingly, I never really thought about this problem before. Yes, it is a problem. But I don't see it as a problem with the protocol. I see it as a user problem. The user could have made change before going to the bar. Further, if this becomes a recurring problem, I imagine the wallets that reach success in the marketplace will ensure that the funds therein are always balanced across multiple unspent outputs.

So, no. I don't agree with you that this is a serious problem that dooms bitcoin to obscurity for all time.

[QuestionAuthority]

This Brock Pierce guy TBF member came up with Realcoin because he sees a problem with Bitcoin adoption and wants a solution.

Has he? I've seen an announcement about Realcoin. It is purported to to be a cryptocurrency that is controlled in lockstep with the US Dollar. Tell me - exactly how is this to be accomplished? I may be dumb, but I don't see any way that anything that we think of as a cryptocurrency can be pegged to something under control of a central bank. Can't be done.

Maybe Pierce has a viable scheme. I don't think he does. I think he's lying. I think he is just trying to attract fantastic sums of VC money with which he can live large -- just like every other failed business in which he has been involved so far.

I don't know whether he has. That what he says he's doing. I think he was planning on using MasterCoin as the protocol layer on top of Bitcoin allowing it to happen. You cut the quote off a little too soon.

I don't know if that's the right way to go but it's one way.

[QuestionAuthority]

Tell me if this is one of the fixes that's about to be released or if it one of the not so serious ones.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=758927.0

I happen to think this is a pretty serious drawback for adoption.

One of the not so serious ones.

Most people understand that attempting to buy a single stick of gum at 7-11 with a $100.00 bill will incur some delay while the metered change machine disgorges ten and twenty spots at a slow rate. Accordingly, most people desiring a speedy transaction will ensure they make change before making the tiny purchase at 7-11.

Personally, having a wallet that contains only a single address (actually unspent output) seems rather astonishing to me. Accordingly, I never really thought about this problem before. Yes, it is a problem. But I don't see it as a problem with the protocol. I see it as a user problem. The user could have made change before going to the bar. Further, if this becomes a recurring problem, I imagine the wallets that reach success in the marketplace will ensure that the funds therein are always balanced across multiple unspent outputs.

So, no. I don't agree with you that this is a serious problem that dooms bitcoin to obscurity for all time.

I don't think I said it dooms Bitcoin to obscurity. I think it will give other coin devs a fighting chance to beat Bitcoin at it own game.

[jbreher]

The entire purpose of fiat was to be more portable and divisible than gold.

Disagree. The entire purpose of fiat was to have a mechanism by which the banking class could incrementally siphon off the wealth from the entire populace.

[rackcityb1]

This thread isn't labeled what does QA want to happen. Change will happen whether I want it too or not.

Ok, I was thinking your account was either sold or you were cynical to the future. I suppose your dystopian vision is one possibility.

Call it whatever. If it's so upgradable then why aren't they doing it? There are a lot of flaws that are being ignored and you know it. (A dev, jgarzik, has to put out a torrent for the blockchain instead of pruning it. We haven't solved the 51% attack yet. And on and on) If I see more upgrading going on then maybe my view will change and I will be convinced.

Technology is being scaffolded all around the Bitcoin blockchain all the time. Some people criticize bitcoin for not solving all of the problems immediately or adding every new feature set within the core protocol but there are some great advantages of keeping bitcoin simple, reliable and modular and other features scaffolded upon bitcoin instead.

If we want adoption ahead of any competitors then the changes need to be made quickly or someone else will make them and be rewarded for the effort. This Brock Pierce guy TBF member came up with Realcoin because he sees a problem with Bitcoin adoption and wants a solution. I don't know if that's the right way to go but it's one way. Big business solves problems quickly because they have the money and resources to throw at problems. Big business and big money are becoming interested in Bitcoin. Will they decide to fix the problems or scrap the old and develop a new one? That's anyone's guess at this point.

I don't think he so much sees a problem with bitcoin but rather saw an opportunity to exploit greed from people wanting to get rich investing in altcoins that are worthless.

[jbreher]

I don't think I said it dooms Bitcoin to obscurity. I think it will give other coin devs a fighting chance to beat Bitcoin at it own game.

Hmm. Maybe. Some other innovation may out-compete Bitcoin. In the same way that other networking protocols preceded TCP/IP.

However, with the VC forces massed behind Bitcoin, rather than other alternatives (none of which -- as yet -- seem to offer anything of value over Bitcoin), it would seem a rather unlikely outcome.

Regardless, this particular 'problem' won't be the fulcrum upon which this universe is toppled.

[keithers]

I don't think this will ever happen because there are too many people in the world that do not have internet access.   Perhaps at some point there will be bitcoin cash created that are basically paper wallet notes or whatever, and those could be used to replace fiat, but then it would just be digital fiat replacing old school fiat...

[jbreher]

I don't think this will ever happen because there are too many people in the world that do not have internet access. 

I think the fact that internet penetration is somewhat less than universal, is largely irrelevant.

We can argue about whether or not bitcoin is a currency or a commodity. Regardless, it shares with fiat the uses of being a store of wealth, and a means of exchanging forms of wealth.

While harsh, it is the reality that by and large, all the world's people that have significant wealth have internet access.

I don't mean to be cold, but those without internet access will have no effect whatsoever -- positive or negative -- in the cutover from fiat to bitcoin. Lacking wealth, they are irrelevant to this process.

[Timetwister]

I have a hard time following the logic when people make a statement that Bitcoin will replace all fiat currency.  In my world view, they coexist and will continue to coexist.  I can see where some fiat currencies die and Bitcoin fills in the gap, but not on a global level.  Your thoughts?

I agree, it would take many decades to completely replace fiat with crypto currencies. A lot of work has to be done, people won't generally use it until they find it easy and superior to fiat.

[Hashminepower]

Well, they will co exist. Maybe bitcoin fills in the position of the 1 and only international currency, travel abroad without exchanging currency

[Timetwister]

Well, they will co exist. Maybe bitcoin fills in the position of the 1 and only international currency, travel abroad without exchanging currency

That's one of the many advantages over fiat. And also consider that you can easily hide the money, so you don't have any problem with customs.

[doitASAP]

Only stupid believe bitcoin will replace Fiat 

[BitcoinZombie]

Only stupid believe bitcoin will replace Fiat  

not all of them, but many people believe it.  
but i'ts not imposible for future