Bitcoin was supposed to be the enemy of governments. It was supposed to destroy the state’s monopoly on monetary policy, it was supposed to be a battering ram against the banks and financial surveillance. Indeed, Bitcoin was supposed to erect nothing less than an uncensorable shadow financial system.
So why have governments ushered Bitcoin through the front door?
Agree here. Prices and "value add" need to be separated. A governance token can add value but the price can remain low. How?
Price isn't a reflection of the decision between all votes or no votes, but one additional vote.A marginal vote is only valuable if it can sway a decision twitter.com/KyleSamani/sta…
- 10 months ago
Water-diamond paradox shows this. Water is valuable--crucial to life--but the marginal bottle of water is cheaper than the marginal diamond b/c of its impact
Codified governance may be important to protocol welfare, but that doesn't mean the token will be venture-scale valuable
- 10 months ago
In July, Mr. McCaleb was selling 20,000 to 40,000 XRP a day. However, starting in August, according to a public clearinghouse of token trades, he started selling 499,312 XRP a day, and at one point sold 752,076 a day. In other words, each day he moved and sold about 35 times the limit outlined in his 2016 agreement with Ripple. For example, over six days ending Wednesday, Mr. McCaleb sold more than 500,000 XRP a day, or about $150,000.
There has been a meme propagated in recent months by the folks over at Ripple Labs. That meme is that the cryptocurrency token known as “Ripple” or “XRP” has absolutely nothing to do with Ripple Labs the company, that XRP pre-existed Ripple Labs the company and was gifted to it, and that the protocol that runs XRP is totally decentralized, à la Bitcoin.