• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Not for someone with access to the traditional banking sector, no. But for those locked out, it’s the only available alternative.

    • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It is only good for that at a limited scale. The issue is that it’s adoption will be stymied, governments not wanting to give up hold to their influence over currency, or not, by the simple fact that it is either in a near constant state of deflation, or it gets abandoned by the broad market. There will have to be one implemented that has it’s scarcity regulated in such a way that it retains a mostly gradual inflation. The way their scarcity is currently designed it essentially forces the currency value to increase significantly, without huge periods without value growth, or it gets dumped.

      A block chain, crypto, that holds a relatively steady value, in a similar manner to normal currency, is what will be needed for it to truly take off as a full market replacement.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        That’s just a Stablecoin, like Tether. Unfortunately, stablecoins have a rather tawdry history as ponzi schemes. Terra/Luna being a classic example.

        • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yes, I am also aware of this. The execution of an anonymous currency was done so poorly, for something trying to be an actual currency alternative, that is set having something like it back decades, if it didn’t kill the idea of a currency that a country didn’t control.