zlacker

The presumed ethos flew out the door the second that fundamentals were traded for chasing the very asset bitcoin was trying to replace (an inevitability vis-a-vis human behavior).

That said, I don't think it's "dead," but rather showing itself for what it is: a well-intentioned attempt at solving corruption of money, predictably co-opted by (and made the bitch of) the very forces it sought to replace. Now, it seems to best exist as a secondary financial rail that you can use if and when it suits your needs.

The original ideological base case failed miserably, unfortunately (sound money).

>>rglove+(OP)
The gov has zero incentive to give up Keynesian (or worse, mmp) controls.

>>helloj+gR
Money is supposed to be a cheap lubricant and not something that becomes more expensive over time until no one can afford it.

Edit:

Imagine if the lubricants in your car get more expensive and you can't afford them anymore, then your car stops working, then you lose your job, you lose your apartment/house.

Now imagine if someone made a universal lubricant that society both runs and depends on. If society runs out of lubricant because it is too expensive, then everything will fail. Having society overflow with excess lubricant will cause issues, but it will still work better than without.