Thoughts: Does your coin or tokens or currency failed the following:
Regardless of sophistication, the underlying premise for hard money:
1. Is it radically neutral?
Is the other crypto invented to enrich the creator and early VCs?
Did the creator give a tonnes to himself, sell tonnes to VCs for money?
Can the creator or a small group of people benefit from Seigniorage effect?
BITCOIN is radically neutral.
2. Is it sufficiently decentralized?
There are at least 2 important aspect of decentralization.
1. Can the protocol be easily shutdown? Highly decentralized means extremely hard to shut down.
2. Can the economic policy of the protocol be changed easily? This aspect is very important. In the fiat currency and most shitcoins, just a few people can change the economic policies.
How small a group of people is sufficient to change the economic policies of the token?
Most of the shitcoins can be changed by a small group of people, less than 10% of the participants.
Even if 51% of the participants can changed the economic policies, it's pathetic.
In BITCOIN, not even 51% of the participants can collude to change the economic policies. Arguable 90% of the network participants is needed for economic consensus to change.
3. Auditability and Supply cap.
In BITCOIN, not just we know the supply cap, every sats is auditable and every issuances is predictable and verifiable.
