Since the day this thread started, bitcoin has lost around 25% of its value. That’s in the same ballpark as the Turkish Lira, which was mentioned earlier as an example of a failing currency. That does not meet any definition of “store of value”.
True, although from the day since Early Retirement Forum itself started, Bitcoin has outperformed every single currency globally, by a vast and decisive amount. In that sense BTC has been far superior as a store of value over any other currency. It hasn't just stored value, it has exceeded and indeed outperformed in the function of store of value. But yes, it is obviously volatile against fiat currencies over short periods of time, as to be expected for a new technology organically growing as a global monetary network.
It’s clear bitcoin (and all other crypto assets) is a highly volatile risk asset , not a digital currency or substitute for payments systems.
These terms "digital currency" and "substitute for payments" are both a matter of semantics and subjective views. To many, BTC does function as both, and indeed one country has already officially adopted BTC as a currency (with the citizens of many other countries already informally doing so). But in the end what "label" we put on BTC is irrelevant with regard its actual functional qualities and properties.
Also, if the point you are making about payments is that BTC is not often used for daily transactions, bear in mind that we have the Lightening Network for day to day transactions. Far more efficient, faster and higher throughput than Visa or Mastercard on fiat. It is the Lightening Network for example that is used for the many micropayments we now see across Latin America, including of course in El Salvador.
While the supply of bitcoin may be finite, the supply of synthetic digital currencies is infinite. After bitcoin we might have bitcoin1, bitcoin2, ...etc. There’s no limit, no end, no barrier.
Try creating your own crypto currency, and see how that goes for you.
Same argument applies to fiat currencies by the way, the number of which are declining over time as the world gravitates towards a smaller number of globally dominant currencies.
Much is made of financial institutions and wealthy individuals investing in crypto assets. That does not mean they believe these assets will soon become part of our financial infrastructure. It only means they all can make money today. They have the means and mechanisms to protect themselves and walk away from that stuff in a heartbeat, leaving people like us holding the bag.
That crypto-currencies are not already part of our financial infrastructure is already beyond doubt. Every single financial institution globally, either directly or indirectly (through its customers) already has exposure to BTC, increasingly such institutions offer crypto related services directly, and that level of exposure is of course only increasing. In my case, a number of the retail banks I use in various countries already have BTC as an asset they custody, exchange, convert, and I also have a number of crypto credit cards integrated with Visa.
As countries launch CBDCs, these will of course also be similarly integrated. Also, for many HNW's, diversifying asset exposure (and that includes to BTC) is not just a function of wanting to "make money" but rather a natural step one takes simply to preserve existing wealth as a defensive mechanism.
The real technological change that is almost entirely absent from this conversation is stable coins, digital payment systems and central bank digital currency. And perhaps decentralized finance. That’s where the real transformation is happening and will continue.
Agreed these are important areas.
BTC functions as the underlying base layer as the fundamental and immutable store of wealth.
Stable coins are a bridge between BTC and fiat, and also give fiat some of the qualities that BTC has (in terms of global transferability). The big difference being stable coins have counterparty risk in that there is an underlying issuer which in theory could be called on to pay out - (much like a bank issuing M2 in excess of deposits).
CBDCs function as fiat currencies (only with even less privacy and freedom for users) and of course with the same flaw of devaluation by money-printing (which BTC serves as defense against).
Defi is a great area of interest and innovation and is a huge disrupter of the role banks currently play. Defi offers benefits to both side of the equation (lender and borrower) but not for the bank as the middleman.
PS - if you wanted to add on to "other interesting areas hardly discussed by relevant to crypoto", you could add in NFTs, the metaverse, DAOs (including decentralized governments), among others.
