Previously, we have been calling Bitcoin digital gold, when in fact, based on the characteristics of Bitcoin, it is not continuously minable and not anonymous enough to be called digital gold at all.
We’ve been calling Grin digital cash, which is also unrealistic. Cash is a currency that can be issued at will, with no fixed issuance rate, and with so many fiat currencies in the world, it’s not uniform.
In fact, Grin has more of the same characteristics as gold.
Therefore, we should boldly say the more accurate slogan:Grin is digital gold.
I sure hope not. Gold doesn’t work as money (for several reasons), and always leads to a system of banks to provide reserve notes (which eventually get replaced by baseless fiat) to be used as money. I don’t want to live in a world of grin banks for the same reasons I don’t want gold banks. Banks are bad for freedom.
I am here for digital money. Not digital gold. Bitcoin’s digital gold narrative is just cope, because they realize they can’t scale to become money. Lets not fall for the same trap.
I do not think we should call Grin digital gold. Sure, many including myself call Bitcoin digital gold which is not really true since Bitcoins supply keeps getting lower (1.76% last year) both in relative and absolute sence due to the halving of the mining reward. Golds stock to flow ratio is around 70, so 1.43% inflation, close to Bitcoin at the moment.
Grin has a stock to flow ratio of 4, so 25% inflation at the moment. Sure, on the long run Grin’s supply is more similar to gold, but at the moment Grin is NOT a good store of value. Calling Grin digital gold will only lead to FOMO and disapointment from those who do not understand supply rates. Grins properties do make it excellent as private scalable digital cash, which IMO is and will be a much better description for Grin.
Imo grin is not digital gold and is not digital cash. Grin is just grin. Imagine how ridiculous it would sound if people, before they started using gold as sov, would say “gold is golden cigarette” (i don’t know what was used before gold, let’s use cigarette as an example even though they came way later). Grin is just a decentralized system which gives you some properties that are nice (higher security due to its simplicity is just one of them). So comparing grin to gold and cash should be considered an insult since they both have worse properties (even if now gold is more suitable as a SOV, over long term grin surpasses it)
That’s cute, but ridiculous. Even though Grin is beautiful in its simplicity, it isn’t just an art project. It exists to provide a utility to people. It exists to become money. Not gold. Not cash. Not even currency. Those are terms for things that tried to be money, but didn’t succeed (or succeeded with drastic compromises). Grin exists to become money, hopefully better than all prior forms of money.
If it fails to achieve that, then Grin is just an art project in the history of human technology.
It doesn’t exist to become money, that’s what you would like to see it become. I don’t see anything wrong with grin being used as a sov, humanity needs a good sov and grin seems like a good choice to me (not now, but as it gets older). Until someone figures out how grin could support many transactions per second i don’t see why anyone would want to use it as money (talking about global adoption, same goes for btc). I’m nowhere near an expert on L2 solutions but i was once on a LN presentation and it seemed like an ugly solution to me, so i don’t support money being on L2 (unless some other L2 design is actually nice).