Bitcoin did not become a trillion-dollar asset because it was better at facilitating online purchases of drugs.
How sure are you of that? It seems very likely that, like all fiat currencies, it was the transactional use which gave a base of it’s value.
This is a good point. I suppose I should have said that Bitcoin would not have reached a $1 trillion dollar valuation if purchasing drugs were the only thing it was useful for.
Also, how sure are you that it’s a trillion-dollar asset?
At one point the spot price times the total Bitcoin available was worth about a trillion. It’s true that a better valuation would take into account the price at which the total supply could be sold to a private buyer, but I don’t know enough to make that calculation.
This is a good point. I suppose I should have said that Bitcoin would not have reached a $1 trillion dollar valuation if purchasing drugs were the only thing it was useful for.
At one point the spot price times the total Bitcoin available was worth about a trillion. It’s true that a better valuation would take into account the price at which the total supply could be sold to a private buyer, but I don’t know enough to make that calculation.