I donât understand why. A stable currency is more valuable for many people, and I believe roles remain for other coins. To break out completely from the legacy financial systems, we need something with a free market value, right? The backbone argument seems sort of infamous, but I havenât been convinced of an alternative way of storing âcommunicationâ (be it monetary value, pointers to data, âŠ) in a convenient central but decentralized manner thatâs sustainable enough to remain available for a long time into the future.
I disagree with the store of wealth argument, because obviously a stable currency will store it more safely assuming it doesnât fail, and something with free value cannot be expected to grow indefinitely. Gold apparently plays a role for many, however, which may be something to compare with and emulate, but thereâs arguments both ways.
Fear of being invested in the wrong project can of course be a cause of criticism, but makes for no good reason.
Please argue against these points. What I value most is arriving at a conclusion, not being right.