Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The computer argument is completely misguided.

People buy a computer when the utility they will derive from it outweighs the monetary cost. They know they may get a better deal in the future, but immediate needs may outweigh potential future savings.



And why wouldn't that argument work for all other goods, too, rendering the deflation argument misguided?


Because most goods don't have the extreme pressure of Moore's law.


Bitcoin is being criticized for having built in deflation (not incidental deflation), thus comparing it to a category of goods (computers) that is also exposed to almost algorithmic deflation is relevant.

So, given the built in deflation of Bitcoins, if you have some Bitcoins and need or want product X, why is knowing that you can have two X in a year, or four X in two, if you just hold on to your coins, going to keep you from getting your X now?

Isn't that too, as you state, a question of whether "the utility they will derive from it outweighs the monetary cost" ?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: