Skip to content

Bitcoin, tokens, maximalism and a bit of history about cryptocurrencies

September 1, 2020

What is and how did maximalism arise in the crypto world? What do tokens have to do with it? Max Carjuzaa, co-founder of Money on Chain, took a historical tour to answer these questions. and in this context he expressed that he did not understand Jameson Lopp’s critics. His gaze and reflections were shared with Cointelegraph en Español.

“”Bitcoin isn’t the only good out there. There are others like bonds, stocks, fiat currencies, houses, cars, watches, jewelry and even T-shirts, ”said Max Carjuzaa. Then he remembered it Maximalism was born there between 2010 and 2011 in response to the number of fraud cases that promised to solve Bitcoin’s problems.

“Many will remember Solid Coin and others. In those days there were already bitcoiners realizing the fabulous monetary properties of bitcoin, which emerged from the synergy of a number of superbly interconnected technologies and incentives as the most robust and resilient p2p value transfer network ever built, “he added .

Bitcoin, tokens, maximalism and a bit of history about cryptocurrenciesBitcoin, tokens, maximalism and a bit of history about cryptocurrencies

But then he made that clear Bitcoin is not just technology, but a social construction based on trust, much like gold. He stated that the value of gold is not essential, but a fact.

As evidence of this fact, he provided four pieces of information:

  • The first is the relationship between the value of gold and that of silver. One ounce of gold is currently worth 71.4 ounces of silver.

  • The second is the abundance of each. There are approximately 19 (not 71.4) ounces of silver per ounce of gold in the earth’s crust.

  • The third is the extraction ratio: for every ounce of gold, approximately 9 ounces of silver (not 71.4) are extracted.

  • The fourth piece of information is the inventory of how much there is for each of the currently available metals that have already been mined and refined in the form of gold bars, shots, or coins.

“According to Thomson Reuters in 2017, there were 71,000 tons of silver and 187,000 tons of gold in stock. Yes, more than twice as much gold as silver. See these numbers It becomes clear that at least some of this value must come from somewhere else, not from its scarcity or industrial use. It comes from this subjective value or this social construction that leads us to prefer to keep the value in gold rather than silver, platinum or palladium”He said.

Back For maximalism, he defined it as a movement that was born in response to the scams that promised Bitcoin 2.0: “These people understood that if Bitcoin, for technological reasons, lost its unmerited place as a store of value, no one could occupy its place “.

And he noted that several reasons support this belief: The first is that value is not intrinsic. The second is that Bitcoin is software. Any technological improvement introduced in another cryptocurrency can be replicated in Bitcoin, on a sidechain, or at a higher layer. “The scariest reason: If Bitcoin loses its place against the cryptocurrency C, nothing prevents C from losing its dominance over D and so on. and sooner or later humanity will stop believing that it is possible to save value in a free and decentralized cryptocurrency, “he said.

According to these concepts, he explained that Bitcoin is an idea, a construction in our heads, the representation that we can have free and digital money, with clear rules that no one can change or eliminate without consensus.

Enter the ICO

Continuing the historical review, he argued that the first ICO was held in 2013 (which of course wasn’t called that): “It was done on the Bitcoin network to fund Mastercoin, a second layer of Bitcoin that ran the first version by Tether or USDT ”.

“In those days, the community was already very used to scams or dubious projects. Projects like Bitcoin 2.0, pre-made coins that were owned almost entirely in the hands of their founders, were widespread,” said Carjuzaa.

At that time, things were more contrasting, more black and white: “There was Bitcoin, there was Namecoin that didn’t pretend to be money – but the market understood that there was Litecoin, a fork of Bitcoin, than all of its Losing value, an honest project I would even dare to say was the only one (or one of the few) that wasn’t pre-fabricated along with Bitcoin. And there were a few experiments and a lot of projects whose only goal was to keep the money away from the distracted. “

“”So far, the maximalists thought Bitcoin was digital gold (although they didn’t call it that) and the rest were shitcoins that only serve to allow the trader to experiment, pump, drain and play”He specified.

Years later came Ethereum and the ICO wave: “Things got a little more confusing. The ICO tokens were not supposed to be digital gold like Bitcoin, but the problem arose from the properties of these tokens and their use. The crypto room was full of impossible projects that were just an idea and would never see the light of day. Most of them were frauds. ”

Evolution and tokens

For the co-founder of MoC, In recent years, the market has developed again: “Tokens have appeared that are much more than the small symbol of amusement arcades, tokens that I can use to control a project, tokens that represent ounces of gold, tokens that represent fiat Represent currencies, tokens that represent stocks, and even tokens that represent cryptokitties. These tokens don’t compete with Bitcoin, they belong to a different category, they are something else. Comparing these tokens to Bitcoin is like comparing shares in Coca Cola, a work of art, or a bottle of wine with gold. “

In conclusion, he said he understood the maximalism that “protects those who enter the crypto world from buying the sweet potatoes of the moment or the fork of the moment”. He also showed an understanding of the fact that there will be one, two or three crypto reserves of value, one of which is much larger than the other, as is the case with gold, silver and platinum.

But he ended: “I don’t understand at all the maximalism that condemns buying a stock because the support on which it is issued is a sign. Yes, I mean the critics of Lop. Maybe we just need to convince Coinmarketcap to change the Bitcoin Dominance Index to one that excludes tokens and only leaves native currencies from networks. Otherwise, we’ll keep comparing the speed to bacon. “

You might be interested in:

Receive Breaking News !

Enable Notifications    Ok No thanks