I don't disagree but wonder whether the fact that it doesn't have a phyiscal property would militate in its favor over gold. I recently read a story about how a Saudi prince was having a few tonnes of gold driven to a neighboring country every day in order to avoid trade restrictions. Seems like it would be a lot easier and safer to just click a button on his computer. That said I could imagine it easily cutting the other way and saying that golds tangible properties are an advantage. This is a fascinating subject!

I don't buy the perfect means of evading capital control argument. Look the mirror trading that a bunch of billionaires used to evade capital controls in Russia: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-28/how-mirro...

It also just involved a click of a button. Nonetheless it was uncovered.

Too often would be cypher-anarchists forget about rubber hose cryptoanaysis. And unlike gold, bitcoin are fundamentally non-fungible and traceable.

The biggest advantage gold has over bitcoin is 5000 plus years of history as a store of value. The biggest advantage bitcoin has over gold is its immateriality. Personally I think the former outweighs the latter (no put intended).

So, I like this line of reasoning. I'll extend it, on the ridiculously generous assumption that 10% of gold holdings will shift into BTC.

$300tn * 0.005 * 0.1 = $150bn.

That's my stab at a fair upper limit for a supportable market cap for BTC.

EDIT so I guess that makes me a short. I'd better sell.

10% seems highly optimistic. I would imagine it be ing an order of magnitude less. Then again. When humans are involved....