The Ethereum community on Twitter is rejecting the skepticism that Bitcoin maximalist and CEO of the micro-blogging platform, Jack Dorsey, expressed towards the claim of an Ethereum supporter, "Cory.eth", that the companies " big tech ”[including Twitter] were afraid of the disruptive traits of the Ethereum industry.
What the Twitter dad said
Jack, responding, stated that he did not consider Ethereum a threat per se, but instead was more focused on integrating Bitcoin into Twitter and any other possible use cases he could find. Dorsey also added that he is very confident in Bitcoin's fundamentals, including its security, founding principles, and decentralization, which he can't say for other cryptocurrencies, which is why Bitcoin is likely to emerge as the internet's native currency.
The recent rejection came from an Ethereum supporter, "DCinvestor", who cast contempt on Dorsey's point of view by stating that it would be one of the biggest miscalculations in the history of the web as there is a huge opportunity for the giants. of social media and other websites to embrace the Ethereum-enabled web 3.0 feature, but none to connect Bitcoin's Lightning network to social media accounts. In a reply to this, the proponent added that focusing on a single internet native currency would restrict Twitter as more currencies for the internet are more likely to emerge.
“There will be more currencies and relevant assets in Web3, and there are already. Focusing on a single native currency is inherently limiting for the IMO ”. Notably, this did not affect Dorsey when he replied: “Focusing on the principles and structure behind any currency is what matters. So, for me, Bitcoin ”.
CBDCs will be the currencies of the internet
Meanwhile, another observer stepped in to counter Dorsey's claim that Bitcoin is the internet's native currency. Natasha Che, an economist who has also shown interest in cryptocurrencies, argued that Bitcoin, being deflationary, would never become the "currency of nothing", as deflation by restricting the supply of one currency was worse than printing too many. money.
Which continues to argue for a long time that Bitcoin would never become a global reserve currency due to the inflexibility of its offering. Bitcoin, which is limited to 21 million coins, if adopted as a world reserve currency would exacerbate the monetary problems the world is already facing since instead of a flexibly adjustable monetary policy to help the economy during times of slumps, such as the gold standard, "a Bitcoin standard" would only make economic downturns last longer and have worse consequences.
“A deflationary asset like #bitcoin will never be the currency of anything. In any money exchange, inflation screws the recipient of the money and deflation screws the sender. Deflation by artificially limiting the supply of a currency is even worse than printing too much money ”.
As evidence that "countercyclical monetary policy is like oxygen," which points out that, despite the $ 3 trillion the Fed printed last year, there was still an estimated $ 13 trillion global shortage as growth in global trade and finance is outpacing the supply of the global reserve currency: the dollar.
As an alternative to using a reserve currency such as Bitcoin or even the dollar, the analysis instead predicts a worldwide economic model in which multiple multiple reserve currencies, as well as private CBDCs and stablecoins will thrive in international trade and settlement.