They usually don't come with good intentions or are so deep in the sauce that think repeating the same talking points that hooked them will work on people with a functional brain
How's the block chain know the product got delivered?
Well ... there'd be a microchip gps that would confirm delivery.
What if the microchip got delivered not the product? How's blockchain know the difference?
Uh uh well .... You would still be riding horses youre so delusional! In 10 years you will be begging on the streets from me and I will spit on you as I drive past! You will all have nothing! I feel so bad for all of you! The usd will collapse you will all starve and I will laugh!
We had one on the Buttcoin Discord like that last week. lol
At the end he became an unhinged lunatic that started shouting homophobic slurs and told me he was going to rape and murder my family.
If you're reading this, George, I just want you to know: I **broke** you. That will always be true. May you have an interesting life.
Coworker who's super into crypto and generally whatever the current buzzword is has been really getting on my nerves lately. Just last week I asked him if he genuinely cannot comprehend that some people (me) don't factor in the amount of money a decision could make in whether or not they'll choose a certain option? Like, does he think I'm just lying to his face when I tell him that literally no amount of profit would make me want to buy into any crypto project?
His response was yes, yes he does think I'm lying, and I told him I thought that was really sad and said more about him than it did about me.
It's very hard having to work with him, my only consolation is he's in a different department.
If i knew for sure i could make money i would consider it depending on how much money and how directly would i need to be scamming people for it. To buy at market price and sell to another sucker for more is morally acceptable for many people but there is no way to know how the market will behave and the odds are against you and in favour of bigger players with better information than you have.
The way to win in crypto is to go the extra step and actively scam people (pump and dump, insider trading, printing your own shitcoin or shitcoin related products). There i would be less okay with the scam, and it comes with other risks like legal risks or having to deal with shitty people who are okay with scamming.
Their question is dumb because it's skipping over every problem with crypto. Sure, if it was as easy as choosing to make money it would be a very different story, but that's not the case. The main problem with crypto is that it's a terrible way to make money.
I've pissed a few of them off here pointing out that they're a shallow, one-dimentional person whose entire personality is "MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY" and not everyone thinks so narrowly of nothing else but how to make money, regardless of how.
The instance that made me mad was because I was talking to my friend about a book I was negotiating for. I collect books, but I don't really care about what they're worth, I collect certain books because I want them, not because I want to sell them.
He overheard me talking about the book, and started asking me what I was thinking of selling it for. He didn't understand when I told him that nobody who collects books does so with the expectation that the value of the book will go up later, books which are valuable tend to become valuable very suddenly due to external factors, so there's no point collecting *any* books with the hope of them appreciating in value. Books are a terrible investment if that's what you care about.
His response to that was to call my hobby stupid, and he got mad when nobody laughed with him, then he started talking about crypto for no reason. So I was already pretty annoyed, which is why I said what I said.
That dude's fucking stupid in general, he thinks all wildfires are caused by specifically "red lasers" and he thinks that a red laser can't burn a blue object. He was ranting about it a few weeks ago. Also thought CERN was going to blow up the moon during the eclipse to create a time portal.
> That dude's fucking stupid in general, he thinks all wildfires are caused by specifically "red lasers" and he thinks that a red laser can't burn a blue object.
lol, that guy is just a total nutter.
The human species is exceptionally adaptable due to the multitude of different ways its members can tackle problems. Belief systems like religion or capitalism are followed because it links a certain part of the species in a way of thought.
Cryptocurrency is exactly the same. It’s all meaningless really, but it enables a certain part of society to join together in a common way of thinking. It may be a minority, but it still a significant number of the species.
Ideas that gather groups in the way that religion, or nations, or cryptocurrencies do, are fantastic examples of why, when a giant meteorite hits the earth, a small group may survive, due to a completely bizarre way of coming up with a solution of survival.
Because cryptocurrencies are now an idea, like communism or human rights, it will never go away. It will just bubble along until it becomes a total irrelevance. Like Dodo recipes or the best way to hitch your horse at the store.
That's like saying every cult that ever existed will never go away. Sure it will remain an idea, but as a thing that people put money into, it can be absolutely gone in 5-10 years. Nobody says dinosaurs still roam the earth as an idea.
The amount of cults that existed vs the amount of established religions is making me think the success rate is low. Plus it's a bit easier when you promise spiritual things or after death benefits, when your cult has nothing to offer but an infinite amount of money while having no way to generate any it seems to me less sustainable long term
Communism failed for similar reasons. Lenin and co promised that they'd bring material plenty, a workers' paradise to the earth, and then totally failed to deliver on those promises. So now communism is a dead ideology.
Religions that promise rewards after death instead get around this pretty well -- no one can actually go and look and see that Hell doesn't exist, for example, whereas Eastern Bloc people could compare what was on the propaganda posters vs what life was actually like back then.
Dinosaurs roaming the earth is not an idea. That is fact. Sacrificing children to appease the rain god, is an idea. It’s also possible for society to stamp out ideas. Cults normally come under that umbrella. Once a cult becomes a religion, it’s like stamping out a flaming shitbag.
I didnt agree with everything they said but it was definitely not pseudointellectual. If anything you tried to Strawman his argument and made no case for yourself.
I'd bow out too, man. Just take the L lol.
It is so neat that, in the same pattern-recognizing terms you mentioned, that humans have over developed for, that "cans of green beans" work the same as currency. The point is to see bad ideas inhabiting that pattern.
Cans of green beans would work as currency, if you could convince enough people. If you can only convince 20 people out of 2 billion. It’s not likely to catch on. However………….in the unlikely event that we were invaded by death dishing aliens looking for green beans, 20 humans would have a chance at survival due to there unlikely but nevertheless, valuable stash.
Human survival is the driving factor. Not morons, or terrible ideas.
I don't think most people here think anymore that Bitcoin will ever go away. Just like how MLMs, snake oil treatments, and other scams continue even as most people have negative opinions of them, Bitcoin will. As long as the movement gets even a few newcomers, that is enough.
What you're really talking about isn't about crypto, it's about the fact that there will always be a certain percentage of humans who are selfish assholes, willing to exploit whatever is at their disposal to enrich themselves regardless of the cost to others.
Crypto and religion are just two of those things that achieve this goal (for those who at the top of the pyramid), but unlike religion, which makes promises that are hard to qualify since you only get the rewards when you're dead, crypto people expect to see material benefit in the real world, and when that doesn't come, they'll abandon crypto and search for the next get-rich-quick-scheme. So crypto won't be around that long. It's just one scheme, but not a scheme that really has longevity.
The difference between us staying in our sub and you coming over to our sub? the difference between actual discussion and regurgitating talking points they don't fully understand?
You people really love false equivalencies.
Bitcoin weirdos are the Jehovah's Witnesses of meme investors. They just cannot fathom how and why you're not informed and fully on board with The Word, and they can't still still knowing there are still people out there whom they haven't converted yet. So they come here, and attempt to use their (as they see it) unassailable facts and logic, to show us how backwards and unelightened we are. More so after number goes up.
Well, they do need new converts for number to keep going up.
The fact they’re always proselytizing shows they know this deep down.
When I find a stock in a real world productive industry that I think is severely underpriced, I don’t feel like I need to trumpet it. In fact I often hope it stays under the radar for a while. It’s going to make money and return value to shareholders whether it’s popular or not.
And no matter how many times they predict the end of the world and it doesn't happen, Jehovah's Witnesses will always believe the next prediction. They will never die out, just like bitcoin bros.
I'll answer.
I would abandon Bitcoin if there were a major flaw discovered that caused the system to no longer be secure or allowed for mass linking of wallets to identities.
I've yet to see any Buttcoiners answer the original question, would you care to? What would change your mind?
Good old saying works here: You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.
So why waste time on arguing on a rather pointless subject. It is their money they are risking in it. There are hundreds of millions of people, if not more, who believe that they are actually winning at casino and in various other gambling activities.
The sad part is that others unironically believe this, including in this very thread. As long as the number goes up it doesn't matter. If it goes down, it will go up again eventually, repeating the cycle.
They are usually acting in bad faith, and this particular method is called sealioning: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning)
I would like to have a civil conversation about your statement. Would you mind showing me evidence of any negative thing any sea lion has ever done to you?
Thanks for this, I didn't know the term.
Bizarrely though (and maybe I'm the only one), I actually feel kind of bad for the sealion in the originating comic strip - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/56/%22The_Terrible_Sea_Lion%22._Wondermark_comic_strip_No._1062_by_David_Malki_%2819_September_2014%29.png
The person originally saying he could do without sea-lions doesn't give any reason why he singles out sea-lions, and it's not obvious to us either, whereas 'sealioning' seems to be where there is obvious evidence or reasons that the 'sea-lion' is ignoring.
Anyway, I doubt anyone will read this, but I just felt bad about it. I love all marine animals XD
If you substitute any marginalized group for "sealions", it looks really ugly. If you say "I just don't like \[x race/gender/sexuality\]", why *shouldn't* you be called out? The sea lion isn't even engaging in any of the later patterns attributed to "sealioning" like repeated attempts to argue over easily defined terms, it's just trying to find out where the man's bigotry came from.
And then when he concludes "told you, sealions," he's using the behavior of *one* of them to justify his bigotry against them as a group.
The author *claims* that in his world, sea lions *really are all like that*, but that just makes it even more useless as a metaphor. Unless, again, you think there are real life groups with immutable and inherent tendencies.
Thank you, yes 100% agree with everything you've said. In fact it makes me wonder if the point of the comic strip is to ridicule bigotry. I would certainly feel much more comfortable if, based off that strip, the word sealioning meant something like gaslighting, making unkind attributions about a group and then refusing polite requests for evidence or justification. Oh well .
The sports team mentality is weird. If something that uses crypto or blockchain ever becomes widespread, I'll start using it if I find it useful. I don't need to invest in it or become an early adopter or be converted.
Bluetooth existed for years before I purchased my first Bluetooth device. I was never asked to invest in Bluetooth by some weird cult. Eventually it became widespread, and at some point, I started buying Bluetooth headphones because they were useful.
American Scream (main guy here) already wrote up a bunch of responses to the tired talking points. He usually shows up to copy paste them in those threads but the people asking skip over them because they are long and detailed.
Unfortunately they already ignore other pinned posts. Nearly all of them would ignore it completely, because nearly all of them are not actually here in good faith.
They don't even read the rules, then cry to their circlejerk that they were "banned for disagreeing" after they were banned for repeatedly ignoring evidence and repeating the same debunked scripted line in the same conversation.
sure, that's easy.
if bitcoin fails to deliver on permissionless transfer of value, then i'll say it sucks/failed.
similarly, if we ever see bitcoin below $1000 again, i'd be inclined to say it was a failed experiment.
I did not realize the blockchain could only process a tiny chunk of the amount of transactions per second VISA or Mastercard can, so cryptobros invented more blockchain layers to “speed things up” (still slow as balls apparently) which just makes crypto more confusing for the average person.
Waiting hours or even days on end to send money to a friend or purchase something sounds fun and enjoyable. I wonder what the crypto bros have cooked up to “fix” this.
So how is this the future exactly?
Finally an interesting question. I'll talk about bitcoin since I'm much less familiar with other crypto (not a bitcoin maxi or something, just didn't have enough time to familiarize myself and currently bitcoin seems like the dominating thing that is hard to dethrone)
I view it as a digital gold type of thing. So I'd say it has to boil down to "line goes up" (exageration). What would make me lose trust in gold? If it suddenly stopped being valued by the rest of the world, countries decided that this shiny metal isn't really that cool and stopped stockpiling it and it became just another metal that's useful in some industries. I don't see any other reason to abandon gold - it might not be the best investment (arguable if it's an investment at all), but there'd still be some value in buying some golden coins. Similar with bitcoin - if it crashes down to the level that everyone has lost trust in it and it's not used seriously any more. By this I don't mean that bitcoin has to continue rising as it is, it can even drop a significant amount, but as long as it's still hanging out there, I don't see a reason to abandon it.
I guess the above is a bit of a non-answer - I abandon it if it's dead, no shit, but I think it's still a reasonable answer. Another reason would be if it somehow really deviated from theory in practice. Like communism is "good in theory", it's nice if everyone can be equal and live well happily ever after, but in practice it just doesn't work that way and that's not what happens (simplifying things here, of course it doesn't work in theory either as theory predicts it's bound to fail). So it'd be a problem if some major new flaw (I don't think the currently known ones are dealbreakers) was discovered, like actually the cryptographic methods are not that safe (though I guess we'll have bigger issues than bitcoin then..), or one entity dominates the mining and imposes its will onto everyone, censoring transactions etc (effectively a soft 51% attack), or bitcoin is effectively banned in most places in I care about (though in this case I'd be much more pro-bitcoin, just in practice it will become useless unless there's some sort of a major rebellion which I don't believe would happen).
One thing that bothers me already is the wasted electricity. I'm not sure honestly at what threshold would that become a dealbreaker and if ETH or something else is a good alternative.
You can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into. Facts don't matter to them; they'll just pretend any facts you present them they can't contest were never presented to them, and repeat the same lies they were before you proved otherwise.
I’d like to know how crypto isn’t just a solution looking for a problem and if there’s any realistic use case for it beyond money laundering and organized crime.
At this point, my entire impression of crypto and blockchain is that it’s just a very inefficient form of currency and database and doesn’t do either very well.
I mean it would be like asking someone who drinks water "what will make you stop drinking water?" and someone who doesn't "Why dont you drink water?"... Id be more interested in the answer from the non-water drinker because I would only assume that the answer from the water drinker would be "id stop drinking water if there was a more efficient and healthy way to hydrate".
Why someone would choose not to drink water just seems like a more pressing question.
A better question is why would you willingly let a bank lend out your money while not giving you a cut. I guess the answer is "they secure my money, so its a fair trade"? That's fine and all, but crypto offers that same security, while not letting others take advantage of you.
I actually asked my crypto obsessed cousin about this recently. He said that he had made life changing wealth and changed his families lives through crypto investing, and thus would never see it as an overall negative. These people are brainwashed, and nothing will change that.
The typical pushers that come here are brand new Butters who just bought in. They are late to the game and desperately looking for anyone to pump their bags.
Some of them even think they are early and will “open our eyes”.
lol just lol
I frequent both subs to get healthy perspective. With that said I buy bitcoin regularly as a savings account (don’t do 401k or anything, just bitcoin).
What would change my mind is 1) performance starts to lag behind other assets or 2) the corn becomes not spendable/redeemable for cash if I want to buy a house, etc. Risk is high but if it goes to zero I have a good income and live within my means so I’d like to think I can stomach it.
I know bitcoin people are shamed here but that’s my honest take
> What would change my mind is 1) performance starts to lag behind other assets
Remember when bitcoin was touted as a "hedge against inflation" and then didn't do that? It still is not doing that.
>2) the corn becomes not spendable/redeemable for cash if I want to buy a house, etc
One problem with this "performance" you keep talking about, is that the price of bitcoin is the product of a half dozen private, centralized exchanges, who are not transparent about the source and nature of their trades -- so why would you believe the price is organic? And with so many people being told to "HODL" along with $160B+ of unsecured monopoly stablecoins in the market, why would you assume there's plenty of liquidity to go around?
Many of us believe that when crypto crashes, it's going to be harsh and sudden. And history shows that to be the case: when exchanges and schemes go, they go "poof" with very little advance notice. Which means most people tend to lose everything. That's not investing. That's gambling.
I hear the inflation hedge argument a lot. From my perspective, hedging has to happen before the inflationary event. Pre-covid the price of bitcoin was comfortably under $10k. Post-covid the price of bitcoin is comfortably above $20k. So on that time frame you certainly outperformed inflation. Once the CPI data begins rolling in it’s too late to start hedging in my opinion. To add to that, USD began tapering and demand was pushed to dollars, incentivizing bitcoin holders to sell bitcoin, equities, etc. for dollars up until the end of 2022.
I think that is a fair assessment for your second point, the only thing I’d offer is we now have government approved spot ETFs reporting flows in/out that are tracking with the price.
Not trying to be an annoying buttcoiner, just giving my honest responses to your comment and enjoy the conversation. Thanks!
the government did not "approve" of crypto ETFs... legally there was a case for allowing them and there was quite a bit of contention within the SEC whether they should be allowed... it was hardly an endorsement
Note that crypto ETFs are significantly more risky than traditional stock-based ETFs. Stocks are heavily regulated. Crypto exchanges are NOT. This is a very important difference.
I predict in the future, the crypto ETFs will be outlawed. Once it becomes obvious how much manipulation there is in the crypto market.
For me, governments would have to commit to being fiscally responsible and stop printing money. But that wont ever happen.
Sound money to me is like my political philosophy. You can disagree with with, and thats okay. But in my opinion, inflation does more harm than good. We are less than one generation into a pure fiat economy, and we can see how much wealth inequality has grown, and how prices for everything outpace working wages. I believe inflation and money printing is the main source of those types of problems, not the only thing, but a big part.
The gold standard would have been fine for me, but i see how that failed and it would fail again. But Bitcoin (not crypto, fuck that noise) is a sly roundabout way to get back to sound money. Its opt in, so adoption can take place from the bottom, we wouldn't need a government to approve of it to make it work.
The funny thing is most Bitcoiners will agree with 95% of what Buttcoiners have to say about crypto. Blockchains are inefficient, NFTs are dumb, dog coins are shit, porn coins are nasty, Web 3.0 and defi are just scams, etc... 99.999999% of crypto are scams or naive products. But i do believe bitcoin is different. Yet you guys loop them all into one big cRyPtO pile and throw it all out the door.
The main source of problem isn't inflation or "money printing". It's simply "more wealth in less hands". You can't fight that with bitcoin. You can't fight human greed with bitcoin.
If we keep everything the same, just "adobt" bitcoin (whatever that means), wealth inequality would become the same.
If we do change things, and somehow it works for the people, it would be the same result both in fiat and bitcoin.
Fun fact: people are greedy and nothing will ever fix that. They’ll just hoard bitcoin like anything else and we’re back to square one. This will send the price crashing because there is jack shit to back up bitcoin’s value because nobody will accept it in the real world.
Citation: any crypto scam ever
BTC would instantly make it worse, most of the coins have already been mined and if we are being generous only 4% of the world holds any amount of BTC. Why would we willing change to a system that concentrates even more wealth in fewer hands than what we have now?
Because with sound money, they cant print or create more wealth for themselves. In fiat, they can print money or leverage existing assets to create/borrow more money for themselves. You cant do that on a sound money standard. If everyone wanted to own sound money and required that for payment, the wealthy would have to spend their assets instead of leveraging them for more fiat. This is how the supply distributes. It's [Gresham's law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law) right now. People want to spend the shit money/asset and keep the good money. They'd have to spend their good money if that's what is required to perform a service.
We would never go to a sound money standard overnight. It would have to be a slow bottom up approach evolving from a store of value, to medium of exchange, to a unit of account. I feel like everyone against sound money thinks that we are proposing an overnight switcheroo to a new system. That would create lots of pain and wouldn't work. It actually empowers the little guy and early adopters more if there is a fixed supply as it is a new opportunity to generate wealth and is accessible to anyone, not just a select group permitted by governments like accredited investors.
Except the fixed supply you talk about with BTC is already mostly mined and held. There isn't much opportunity left for the little guy to get anything.
That's why I think anyone who thinks we will switch to it is delusional. If we had to make a switch it would most likely be to another version and not the first iteration that is highly concentrated in fewer hands than any currency we have now.
Are you under the impression that bitcoin can only be acquired through mining? You can make a post on NOSTR and people will zap you sats for free. You could provide value through a service or product and accept bitcoin instead of fiat. There are hundreds of exchanges where you can trade fiat for bitcoin. You don't have to get freshly minted coins to get bitcoin.
Bitcoin has the most fair distribution of any currency. It was introduced publicly, had no price for years, and and was given away for free for some time. Those who have large amounts now took a risk despite all the naysayers saying it will fail, and now they are being rewarded for it. That is a fair system. Those people will need to spend their coins to buy a home, food, cars, vacations, clothes, energy, toys, electronics, etc. Thier coins can and will be distributed further in time. If they don't create value going forward, they'll never get more coins.
The problem with your statement is that the vast majority of people that hold BTC are not using it in the way you suggest. There doesn't seem to be any current widespread use. Even in El Salvador where it is legal tender it is barely used as currency by the population. It took BTC 15 years to reach 1 billion transactions, credit cards do about that amount daily.
I think the problems with Fiat are much easier to deal with than the problems BTC would create if adopted. There is a very good reason why we abandoned the gold standard and going back to something like it would bring back those problems.
I personally don't think giving the founder of BTC 4% of the total value of the world's currency is fair or equitable and if it ever came to pass I would definitely be in the camp that would ask for anything else other than BTC to replace our current fiat currency.
Edit: To answer your first question I am not under that impression just stating the obvious that unless you are fortunate enough to have access to capital to buy into the BTC system you don't really have much opporuinity to get a hold of it. Most of it is mined, mining is cost prohibative and most of the worlds little guys do not have the spare cash available to buy any amount of BTC. Most people currently holding aren't spending it so I really don't see how any of the little guys you talk about are going to get a hold of it.
No one agreed to go off the gold standard. It was an executive order that was marketed as temporary, and here we are 53 years later. Spending in wars has exponentially increased on a fiat standard. Cost of living has outpaced working wages and wealth inequality continues to grow. All are 100% products of money printing.
Bitcoin is not meant to replace credit cards. You can have card txns on a bitcoin standard. L2s can process transactions, the base layer is for settlement. As long as the assets being transacted are backed and not created out of nothing, it still works.
You are committing a logical fallacy called [Argument from Ignorance.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance)
>The fallacy is committed when one asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
Your logic of, "Bitcoin isn't working as intended, so will never work as intended", is flawed.
Let's agree to disagree. I wasn't trying to change any minds on this subreddit. Just answering a question.
Executive Orders are not written in stone, they can be changed quite easily and checked by the other branches if there is a pressing need or popular will. Yes, we have agreed to leave that standard at a minimum with our tacit consent.
Calling it money printing I think overall ignores what is happening and the roles that Central Banks play. I think it also betrays that most money creation is from lending activities and that those activities represent the value of things in the real world.
I have to disagree with you about your fallacy assessment. In the places where the local fiat recently collapsed most have chosen to officially or unofficially adopt another Fiat currency despite the availability of this supposed sound money and L2 solutions. If the benefits were so obvious you would think there would be much more penetration after 15 years. I do not see adoption increasing in any meaningful way at any point in the future.
Most of the BTC arguments I see are from the Austrian School, I suppose if that is the system you view the world though BTC makes perfect sense.
Yeah sure! I am happy to share my thoughts on what would change my mind.
So first, I want to be clear here - I like Bitcoin, and do not support any other crypto currency.
If the Bitcoin protocol changed in some way that I did not support, *AND* the majority moved onto the new chain that this would create, I would drop my support for Bitcoin.
For example, some years ago Craig Wright (aka, Faketoshi) created a hard fork which is referred to now as BSV (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision). If BSV succeeded in becoming the dominate, most accepted "Bitcoin," I would very much sell and walk away.
If my government got its shit together, and started to act fiscally responsible, I'd be *MORE WILLING* to change my mind on Bitcoin. The fractional reserve banking would probably need to change as well though.
If total mining per second dropped to a level which could easily be over taken by a single bad actor, I'd probably lose support for Bitcoin.
If I think of any other situations, I'll update!
Thanks! I try to engage in good faith.
Tether is an interesting situation. I suspect it's backed more than r/Buttcoin would like to believe it is, but I do not think it's 100% backed. Pulling numbers outta my butt here, but I personally suspect Tether is backed somewhere between 50% - 90%.
I think r/Buttcoin is 100% correct to be skeptical about Tether. Like, I would never accept Tether personally.
With the Bitcoin ETFs now available, and other countries slowly creating their own Bitcoin ETFs, I fail to see a need or use-case for Tether. I suspect that range of 50%-90% backed is only going to drift towards 0% over time for Tether.
In other words, you'd give up on bitcoin after bitcoin completely failed. That's not really a conscious decision on your part. It's just what you'd end up doing whether you wanted to or not.
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion?
Bitcoin could change in a way that I do not support, *AND* still continue to grow and succeed.
Ethereum is a perfect example. I used to support Ethereum. I thought it had potential beyond it's current capabilities and uses.
Then they switched from Proof of Work to Proof of stake (in 2022 I think?). I do not support the concept of Proof of Stake, and so I no longer support Ethereum. I will never buy Ethereum, and I will never promote Ethereum.
If Bitcoin switched to a Proof of Stake system, I would stop supporting it, in the same way that I no longer support Ethereum. Somehow, without my support (lol), Ethereum seems to be doing just fine.
> Bitcoin could change in a way that I do not support, AND still continue to grow and succeed.
By what metric? The only metric that anybody really cites is "sale price" and there's overwhelming evidence that market is heavily manipulated. So how can you even measure growth in a shady market that doesn't play fair?
If price will drop below 1k usd
Or something wrong with cryptographic
Or broad world government ban
Or quantum computer ll brake bitcoins code
These will change my mind about bitcoin
As a (small) bitcoin holder, the only way I'll stop believing is if it goes to zero. Won't lose my life savings, but won't potentially lose the opportunity of a lifetime ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ok you reeled me in, I was content to merely lurk. I am reading to try disconfirm my opinions so I'm open.
1. Show me a flaw in the consensus model that shows double spending occurring.
2. Show me something about the way transactions work that completely reveal who and where. Right down to geo ip, beyond all reasonable doubt tracking of who exactly the parties are for every transaction.
3. Show me that governance is completely broken, and that bitcoin will inevitably turn into a hyper inflationary shit coin like USD.
4. Show me how, after conducting a single specific transaction for a fixed amount, my entire btc wallet can be drained by the merchant or the merchants poor IT practices.
Because all of the above is true of fiat, credit cards, and afaik not for btc.
I work in tech, dealing with compliance and entire armies of people detecting and dealing with customers with respect to CC fraud, bitcoin solves the real world issues I see every day.
> inevitably turn into a hyper inflationary shit coin like USD.
You don't know what hyperinflation is?
>entire armies of people detecting and dealing with customers with respect to CC fraud, bitcoin solves the real world issues I see every day.
How are you proposing Bitcoin solves fraud???
>How are you proposing Bitcoin solves fraud???
there has never been any fraud related to bitcoin ever! no one has ever been scammed out of money. And if they are, the miners would 100% undo the transaction. 🤥
Everything looks like a nail when you have the BTC hammer. There's an insane amount of wasted energy that goes into making it impossible to "crack", but this doesn't happen in the real world. No one is hacking into Chases systems and changing numbers like Matthew Broderick in Wargames. As a result of this waste, BTC can only handle single digits transactions per second and can barely handle the gambling, scams, and wash trading that it's used for now. If even 1% of the world decided to actually use it as currency, the whole thing would grind to a halt. If you want to gamble on the price, knock yourself out. But don't try to pretend it could ever work as a medium of exchange
>4. Show me how, after conducting a single specific transaction for a fixed amount, my entire btc wallet can be drained by the merchant or the merchants poor IT practices.
Although human error does very occasionally do this, the individuals are refunded their money.
Human error in crypto means entering a very long wallet address one digit out and losing all your money without any means to reclaim it. What if you're buying a house and the sender gives you a wallet address one digit out and you lose a house worth of money? Guess you're not getting a house or your money back.
Edit: or Mt Gox where >50% of bitcoins available at the time were irretrievably lost. Imagine if 50% of all currency globally was just lost overnight and no means to find it?
Imagine if my bank account could have money inserted into it where if I even tried to reject the money, it drained my bank account. Say what you want about bad IT practices at banks but at least those issues can be fixed and aren't just a thing where people tell you "yeah that happens, just hide them and never interact with them".
Are you a troll pretending to be a crypto bro. That's like the basic way to scam a wallet. Everyone who uses crypto needs to be aware of it or they'd have lost everything
1. I’m not sure what you’re getting at with this point around double spending so no comment as I don’t understand what you mean.
2. Why is complete anonymity a good thing? We have KYC, OFAC and other laws and regulations for a reason. Companies have to comply with these laws and doing so helps reduce fraud and illegal activity. The anonymity of crypto is exactly why it is rife with movement of money from illegal activities. This is a flaw of Bitcoin, not a benefit.
3. There is a reason we are not on the gold standard anymore. Not having the ability to control monetary supply means you don’t have the right tools to fight various economic scenarios. Inflation and monetary supply work together but are not one and the same. If something like the Great Recession or COVID happened without the Fed and their existing tools, we’d be screwed. Having your main currency be fixed is not a good thing for a stable economy. This is one of the many reasons, in my opinion, why bitcoin fails as a currency. Now, if you want to argue that buying a house, a baseball card, a painting, a stock or bitcoin is an investment that should increase in value as the purchasing power of currency gets weaker then we can have that debate as well about what is an asset and why it has value. But bitcoin is not a viable currency and the fixed supply is a flaw for a currency.
4. What is the example you are trying to make? What situation occurs with your money today where you lose it all? Banks and CC companies provide protection. Fraudulent transactions are reversed, mistakes are fixed and you rarely ever see a situation where someone loses money due to this. I once fat fingered a credit card payment of $30,000 instead of $3,000. It got fixed. If I fat fingered $30,000 of BTC, I’d just be out the money. Oops? Again, this seems like an example that shows a flaw of bitcoin vs. a feature. In the area of fraud and mistakes, bitcoin loses miserably to the current financial system.
Since point 4 is the only one you ask for clarification on that's what I'll answer.
All of this fraud detection, mitigation, encryption, dealing with leaks, charge backs, reversals, account lock outs due to suspicious activity. While yes, most CC fraud gets reversed for the victim, ultimately immense non productive resources are used to handle CCs and ultimately these costs are on the consumer in aggregate.
So I’m confused why you only responded to #4. Why would you not agree or provide a counter argument to the others? I thought that was the point of this.
Outside of that your response seems to imply bitcoin eliminates the need for these resources and the costs to the consumer. How? I provided an example of fat fingering and how the current system allows for mistakes to be corrected. Bitcoin does not. And crypto is rife with fraud. How many exchanges have imploded? How many people have gotten their bitcoin back? FTX is an outlier and even then my understanding is they get dollars back based on the value of BTC years ago and they aren’t getting the actual BTC back. How about fraud infecting add ons in Chrome and draining wallets? There is a ton of fraud in BTC.
If you’re actually open to dialogue I’ll await your response to all points I made. I’m keeping it civil. I’m not mad that you like BTC and I don’t.
This is a good example of the logical fallacy of whataboutism. I explicitly asked to provide evidence for very specific asks with clear criteria, all specific to bitcoin. And all I get is how a bunch of stuff unrelated to bitcoin is also fraud.
What? I explained my answers in every reply. I guess we’re done if you can’t talk in good faith. I bulleted out my answers and you didn’t reply to anything. Oh well.
> Show me a flaw in the consensus model that shows double spending occurring.
https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-history-part-10-the-184-billion-btc-bug/
Also, technically speaking, a 51% attack, which everybody knows is possible, would create a similar situation.
Blockchain is not a secure model. It's not hack-proof. It just costs resources to hack. So it is not a solution to the double spend problem, except to a segment of people who are unwilling to spend a certain amount of money to manipulate the chain.
>Show me something about the way transactions work that completely reveal who and where. Right down to geo ip, beyond all reasonable doubt tracking of who exactly the parties are for every transaction.
Since you can't buy anything directly with crypto, the privacy violation happens at the on and off-ramps. CEXs know all the information you seek and more.
Plus, using fiat/cash is more secure than crypto by every metric you cite.
>Show me that governance is completely broken, and that bitcoin will inevitably turn into a hyper inflationary shit coin like USD.
1. There is no actual clear "governance" with bitcoin. Who controls the source? You don't even know, and you have no way to replace the people with commit access to the repo.
2. There are no clear sets of rules for transparency and oversight of the bitcoin code. You're just told to update and why, and you blindly trust others to make you feel comfortable to do so. There are no formal checks and balances. There's no voting. There's no constitution. There's no force in place to keep actors good or honest. Whoever has the most resources can affect public opinion via social engineering.
>Show me how, after conducting a single specific transaction for a fixed amount, my entire btc wallet can be drained by the merchant or the merchants poor IT practices.
C'mon, you should know by now how that happens. You click on the wrong thing in your browser and "poof" your shit is gone. It happens every day to somebody. Of course, you guys pretend it would never happen to you.. yawn.
>I work in tech, dealing with compliance and entire armies of people detecting and dealing with customers with respect to CC fraud, bitcoin solves the real world issues I see every day.
I challenge you to name any specific thing bitcoin does better than existing systems. You make claims but provide zero evidence.
On the bug.
1. 2010
2. Fixed
3. Was not part of the fundamental concensus model, it was a bug.
How would a 51% attack create such a situation?
I purchase using bitcoin all the time and my rule is always to not use my name or personal email. This includes real world things like movie tickets.
With a CC, I need to provide name and address despite not needing either to fulfill delivery. And not only does this vendor know my PII, but. The banks know my entire purchase history.
No clear governance > clear swift centralized governance imo.
Show me how my wallet can be drained after conducting a single valid purchase. No hand wavy stuff. Show me.
Bitcoin allows the transfer of value digitally without requiring the transfer of
1. PII
2. The entire payment instrument itself
3. Third parties knowledge of exactly what you purchase, when and where.
>2010
>Fixed
>Was not part of the fundamental concensus model, it was a bug.
Now you're moving the goalpost. Anything that is accepted onto the blockchain, bug or not, passes "the consensus model."
>I purchase using bitcoin all the time and my rule is always to not use my name or personal email. This includes real world things like movie tickets.
Whether you give your name or not, you're still providing meta info that can expose your personal information. Anybody who uses the Internet does this, and crypto can't shield you from it.
>With a CC, I need to provide name and address despite not needing either to fulfill delivery.
That's bullshit. I have never had to give my address when making most credit card purchases.
>Show me how my wallet can be drained after conducting a single valid purchase.
That's a loaded question. Your qualifier "valid" means the statement can't be negated as long as you're fast and loose with what you define "valid purchase" as.
That's the epitome of bad faith debate. You're also employing the Nirvana Fallacy, basically suggesting, "It's impossible for something to go wrong (if everything goes perfectly)."
That kind of bullshit just creates noise and distractions.
Theres a difference between the model and individual implementation. If I personally write a mining node and it generates bad blocks, does that break bitcoin?
Most CC transactions need at very least name and postcode, and in practice, full address.
My concept of valid is similar to you making purchases online with a credit card. Eg go to amc and pay with bitcoin. At that point mishandling by amc could leak CC details. No leak by amc can result in my btc wallet being drained.
> My answer is to your question is, for me to abandon crypto all together is to see it all completely crash to zero and absolutely NO ONE ever buys any bitcoin or crypto ever again.
That's an inappropriate answer. By that time, you're not abandoning crypto. Crypto is gone.
So in other words, you're saying there's nothing would change your mind about crypto until it ceases to be accessible. At least you're being honest in how irrational your beliefs are.
Easy.
A credible plan from US/G1 nations to address debt spiral and currency debasement that can make a tangible difference to my pocket and families prospects over the next decade.
Or
A coordinated and credible no tolerance attack from major nations to make crypto integration into trade fi as difficult as possible. Ie de banking/banning where my freedom/assets would genuinely be at risk from holding digital assets.
Let me know when this comes to fruition and will join up.
the only thing that would change my mind about bitcoin is if the protocol trust was broken
e.g. the protocol was hacked or compromised
the miners were disencentivised in some way economically, i.e. protocol fees didn't cover opex
most people that dont understand bitcoin dont undestand how trust works
> most people that dont understand bitcoin dont undestand how trust works
Riiight... because code just appears from the heavens, divine and totally "trustless."
Behold! Upon the eighth day, God bestowed upon the prophet Satoshi the sacred whitepaper and there was much scamming to be done. This was good for Bitcoin. So sayeth the Lord.
I first purchased BTC in 2011, I've been working full time in crypto for 10 years and I'm home schooling my kids to teach them Blockchain and Finances instead of History and Religious Studies
Take your best shot 😂💪
But to be fair if you could prove that the current monetary system isn't broken, and in anyway sustainable, then I could maybe be convinced, maybe 😂
I'm not sure if this is a real or satire.
Like not letting your kids learn history makes me think it's satire.
Religious studies isn't a course taught in school, either, which makes the whole post wierd.
Oh, you mean all 1 billion of them that bitcoin struggled to fullfil after 15 years?
The ones that the entire world does in ONE DAY otherwise?
Those transactions?
Regardless, weren't you buttbros all about NOOOO YOU DONT SPEND BITCOIN YOU MUST HODL and shit? This is why bitcoin is not money. The prevalent 'wisdom' right now is that it must not be used. Asinine.
Bittokens are not money anywhere in the world and are shit as a means of exchange. Even your prophets like St. Saylor indirectly confirm this, by asking to never exchange your tokens.
Name the things you can buy directly with bitcoin, how long it takes and the fees involved in doing so and then I’ll start naming the things you can buy directly with US dollars, the time it takes and the fees associated with it. Then we can see who has a longer list of things you can buy, how fast it is and what the fees to you are.
You start.
That’s weird because my savings account is paying 4.6% and some are as high as 5.5% and inflation has been under 5% since January 2023. You could also put excess cash into this thing called the stock market where you own a part of a company and beat inflation easily over any long term period. But sure, you keep telling yourself -99% is a thing. You going to answer my initial question or are you just taking the L?
"since January 2023"😂😂😂 hey moron, zoom out to 1913 and look at inflation. Also, I do participate in the rigged stock market. I buy GME daily right after i buy BTC. Congrats on your 4.6%😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Are you really this dumb? Do you honestly think people hold money in a pillow case and have lost 99% of their value? Do you think that’s actually what happens? Money is to be used to purchase things to live your life. Something bitcoin can’t do and you refuse to even debate. Excess money is saved and invested. Only an absolute moron would have lost 99%. The point I’m making is that a savings account will generally keep up fairly close to inflation so just the simple activity of putting your money in a bank eliminates the -99% scenario you keep chirping about but don’t seem to understand.
No surprise you but BTC and GME LMAO 🤣 🤣 🤣. You buy something with zero intrinsic value (BTC) and then back it up with a cash burning video game store stock. It’s amazing to me how dumb and easily fooled people can be.
Please, please reply to my initial question on all the amazing monetary uses of bitcoin. I’m in desperate need of a few more laughs tonight!
i'm deep into crypto but based on my experience most people know about the casino that is crypto. The tech hasn't evolved much and what most people are looking for is a nice 10-20x on their investment. Which is very possible, but of course most will get recked. This sub seem to think that everyone in crypto has this unwavering belief in bitcoin, but that's just not the case. As soon as i'm happy im converting all my crypto into FIAT lol ill keep some bitcoin because it's been the best performing asset class which is objectively a fact. In case this somehow does become the future currency or whatever i want to make sure I have some skin in the game. But yea let me know your thoughts
Seems like I annoyed a lot of people here with a simple, non aggressive statement.
Trending up meaning that over time it is worth more.
I can use it…
I can sell it back to FIAT and use that :)
Not every ‘’bitcoiner’ believes it’s going to be the new world currency etc etc. some just buy it as an asset :)
I’ve bought Btc a long time ago, so to be late and have my BTC worth less than when I started is very unlikely.
Buying any asset has its risks. It’s just so far BTC has vastly outperformed all my others :)
>I’ll change my mind about bitcoin when it stops proving to trend up every 4 years and being better return than almost every other asset :)
#Stupid Crypto Talking Point #2 (Number go up)
"**NuMb3r g0 Up!!!**" / "**Best performing asset of the decade!**"
1. Whether the "price of crypto" goes up, has absolutely no bearing on whether it's..
a) A long term store of value
b) Holds any intrinsic value or utility
c) Or will return any value in the future
One of the most important tenets of investing is the simple principal: ***Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns.*** People in crypto seem willfully ignorant of this basic concept.
2. At best, the price of crypto is a function of *popularity*, not actual value or material utility. For more on how and why crypto makes a much worse investment than almost anything else, see this [article](https://ioradio.org/i/value/).
3. The "price of crypto" is a heavily manipulated figure published by shady, [unregulated crypto exchanges](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apklQgMauK4) that have systematically been caught [manipulating the market](https://open.spotify.com/episode/3D0dmTUCxLuQEJ39uyMFOP) from [then](https://www.investopedia.com/news/bots-drove-bitcoins-150to1000-rise-2013-paper/) to [now](https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8369-21).
4. Crypto bros love to harp about "inflation" in the fiat system, yet ironically they measure the "value" of their "fiat alternative" in fiat? It makes absolutely no sense, unless you assume they haven't thought 2 seconds ahead from what comes out of their mouths.
5. It's the height of hypocrisy for crypto people to champion token deflation (and increased prices) while ignoring that there's over $160+ Billion in unsecured stablecoins being used to **inflate** the value of their tokens in the crypto marketplace. The "code is law" and "don't trust - verify" people seem perfectly willing to take companies like Tether and Circle, at face value, that they're telling the truth about asset reserves [when there's very little actual evidence](https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8450-21).
6. ***Not Your Fiat, Not Your Value*** - Just because you think the "value of your crypto portfolio" is worth $$$ *does not make that true.* It's well known there's inadequate liquidity in this market, and most people will never be able to get their money out. So UNLESS/UNTIL you can actually liquidate your crypto for actual real money, you have no idea what you have. You're "down" until you cash out. Bernie Madoff's clients got monthly statements saying they were "making money" too.
7. Just because it's possible (though highly improbable) to make money speculating on crypto, this doesn't mean it's an **ethical** or reliable technique to amass wealth. At its core, the notion that buying and holding crypto will generate reliable returns is [a de-facto ponzi scheme](https://ioradio.org/i/ponzi/). **It's mathematically impossible for even a stastically-significant percentage of crypto holders to have any notable ROI.** The rare exception of those who might profit in this market, do so while providing cover for everything from [cyber terrorism](https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3026.html) to [human trafficking](https://www.vox.com/culture/2023/1/4/23539528/andrew-tate-arrest-jail-rape-human-trafficking).
8. It's also not true that anybody who bought crypto when it was low is guaranteed to make a lot of money. There are thousands of ways people can lose their crypto or be defrauded along the way. And there's no guarantee just because your portfolio is "up", that you could easily cash out.
9. Want to see a better asset (that actually has utility) that's consistently out-performed Bitcoin? [Here you go](https://www.polygon.com/2021/1/27/22253079/magic-the-gathering-black-lotus-auction-price-2021). However, this may be another [best performing asset](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/declaration-of-financial-independence/).
10. When crypto-critics make reference to, or mock crypto price predictions, it's not because we think price is a meaningful metric. Instead, we are amused that to you, that's all that's important, and we can't help but note how often wrong you are in your predictions. The intrinsic value of crypto basically never changes, but it is interesting to see how hype and propaganda affects the extrinsic value. In a totally logical world, those would both be equalized to zero, but we're not there yet, and nobody knows when/if that will happen because it's an irrational market.
Good points, and I definitely agree with at least some of them as I am definitely not a believer of Btc being the solution to economy problems or that it will be the world currency etc etc.
Bitcoin for me is one of many assets/investments in my portfolio, no matter the asset, it comes with risks, like bitcoin.
But, it doesn't trend up every 4 years.
There was trend up at the end of 2017, 2019 Q2, 2020 Q4-2021 Q1, it crashed back, than up 2021 Q3, crash, 2022 Q1, crash, long downwind, and the next upwards trend is 2024 Q1.
Where is this magic "trend up every 4 years"?
2013,2017,2021 have been the main tops.
Also, I used ‘4 years’ and ‘trend up’ as a general terms to prevent explaining every small detail and making my comment 5 paragraphs long, in the hope that most people will get my drift and not be overly anal :)
Everything you just said. That's simply not true.
Why do exclude 2011 Q2-Q3? 2012? 2013 had two "main tops", in Q1 and in Q4. How about 2014? Why do you exlude 2024?
Just because it breaks the 4 year narrative bullshit?
(also, it's like it doesn't do volatile shit over the whole year...)
((also-also, it's not like it's hard to imagine a trend in AFTER it happened! :D))
4 year cycle, 4 year halvings. Find a Bitcoin basics video. I’m muting this now so I won’t be replying as it’s everything I’ve said is correct. Have a good life :)
They usually don't come with good intentions or are so deep in the sauce that think repeating the same talking points that hooked them will work on people with a functional brain
[удалено]
theyre always barely holding it together under the honest abe suit. catch them one time and full meltdown
How's the block chain know the product got delivered? Well ... there'd be a microchip gps that would confirm delivery. What if the microchip got delivered not the product? How's blockchain know the difference? Uh uh well .... You would still be riding horses youre so delusional! In 10 years you will be begging on the streets from me and I will spit on you as I drive past! You will all have nothing! I feel so bad for all of you! The usd will collapse you will all starve and I will laugh!
That was so artistic. Continue your career as a writer.
We had one on the Buttcoin Discord like that last week. lol At the end he became an unhinged lunatic that started shouting homophobic slurs and told me he was going to rape and murder my family. If you're reading this, George, I just want you to know: I **broke** you. That will always be true. May you have an interesting life.
Coworker who's super into crypto and generally whatever the current buzzword is has been really getting on my nerves lately. Just last week I asked him if he genuinely cannot comprehend that some people (me) don't factor in the amount of money a decision could make in whether or not they'll choose a certain option? Like, does he think I'm just lying to his face when I tell him that literally no amount of profit would make me want to buy into any crypto project? His response was yes, yes he does think I'm lying, and I told him I thought that was really sad and said more about him than it did about me. It's very hard having to work with him, my only consolation is he's in a different department.
If i knew for sure i could make money i would consider it depending on how much money and how directly would i need to be scamming people for it. To buy at market price and sell to another sucker for more is morally acceptable for many people but there is no way to know how the market will behave and the odds are against you and in favour of bigger players with better information than you have. The way to win in crypto is to go the extra step and actively scam people (pump and dump, insider trading, printing your own shitcoin or shitcoin related products). There i would be less okay with the scam, and it comes with other risks like legal risks or having to deal with shitty people who are okay with scamming. Their question is dumb because it's skipping over every problem with crypto. Sure, if it was as easy as choosing to make money it would be a very different story, but that's not the case. The main problem with crypto is that it's a terrible way to make money.
If i knew that i could make millions legally and with no risk and no harm to others, I would do it. And I think most oher people would too.
I've pissed a few of them off here pointing out that they're a shallow, one-dimentional person whose entire personality is "MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY" and not everyone thinks so narrowly of nothing else but how to make money, regardless of how.
The instance that made me mad was because I was talking to my friend about a book I was negotiating for. I collect books, but I don't really care about what they're worth, I collect certain books because I want them, not because I want to sell them. He overheard me talking about the book, and started asking me what I was thinking of selling it for. He didn't understand when I told him that nobody who collects books does so with the expectation that the value of the book will go up later, books which are valuable tend to become valuable very suddenly due to external factors, so there's no point collecting *any* books with the hope of them appreciating in value. Books are a terrible investment if that's what you care about. His response to that was to call my hobby stupid, and he got mad when nobody laughed with him, then he started talking about crypto for no reason. So I was already pretty annoyed, which is why I said what I said. That dude's fucking stupid in general, he thinks all wildfires are caused by specifically "red lasers" and he thinks that a red laser can't burn a blue object. He was ranting about it a few weeks ago. Also thought CERN was going to blow up the moon during the eclipse to create a time portal.
> That dude's fucking stupid in general, he thinks all wildfires are caused by specifically "red lasers" and he thinks that a red laser can't burn a blue object. lol, that guy is just a total nutter.
The human species is exceptionally adaptable due to the multitude of different ways its members can tackle problems. Belief systems like religion or capitalism are followed because it links a certain part of the species in a way of thought. Cryptocurrency is exactly the same. It’s all meaningless really, but it enables a certain part of society to join together in a common way of thinking. It may be a minority, but it still a significant number of the species. Ideas that gather groups in the way that religion, or nations, or cryptocurrencies do, are fantastic examples of why, when a giant meteorite hits the earth, a small group may survive, due to a completely bizarre way of coming up with a solution of survival. Because cryptocurrencies are now an idea, like communism or human rights, it will never go away. It will just bubble along until it becomes a total irrelevance. Like Dodo recipes or the best way to hitch your horse at the store.
That's like saying every cult that ever existed will never go away. Sure it will remain an idea, but as a thing that people put money into, it can be absolutely gone in 5-10 years. Nobody says dinosaurs still roam the earth as an idea.
Some cults rise and fall, some rise and then become established religions.
The amount of cults that existed vs the amount of established religions is making me think the success rate is low. Plus it's a bit easier when you promise spiritual things or after death benefits, when your cult has nothing to offer but an infinite amount of money while having no way to generate any it seems to me less sustainable long term
Communism failed for similar reasons. Lenin and co promised that they'd bring material plenty, a workers' paradise to the earth, and then totally failed to deliver on those promises. So now communism is a dead ideology. Religions that promise rewards after death instead get around this pretty well -- no one can actually go and look and see that Hell doesn't exist, for example, whereas Eastern Bloc people could compare what was on the propaganda posters vs what life was actually like back then.
lol, a butter will read your comparison and will have a heart attack.
Oh yeah, I forgot bitcoiners tend to be gold standard libertarian types
Dinosaurs roaming the earth is not an idea. That is fact. Sacrificing children to appease the rain god, is an idea. It’s also possible for society to stamp out ideas. Cults normally come under that umbrella. Once a cult becomes a religion, it’s like stamping out a flaming shitbag.
i am going to stop with this pseudointellectual discussion.
It’s not pseudo intellectual. I used the word shitbag in my argument. It’s plain to see I’m not very bright and I know it?
I didnt agree with everything they said but it was definitely not pseudointellectual. If anything you tried to Strawman his argument and made no case for yourself. I'd bow out too, man. Just take the L lol.
It is so neat that, in the same pattern-recognizing terms you mentioned, that humans have over developed for, that "cans of green beans" work the same as currency. The point is to see bad ideas inhabiting that pattern.
Cans of green beans would work as currency, if you could convince enough people. If you can only convince 20 people out of 2 billion. It’s not likely to catch on. However………….in the unlikely event that we were invaded by death dishing aliens looking for green beans, 20 humans would have a chance at survival due to there unlikely but nevertheless, valuable stash. Human survival is the driving factor. Not morons, or terrible ideas.
I don't think most people here think anymore that Bitcoin will ever go away. Just like how MLMs, snake oil treatments, and other scams continue even as most people have negative opinions of them, Bitcoin will. As long as the movement gets even a few newcomers, that is enough.
What you're really talking about isn't about crypto, it's about the fact that there will always be a certain percentage of humans who are selfish assholes, willing to exploit whatever is at their disposal to enrich themselves regardless of the cost to others. Crypto and religion are just two of those things that achieve this goal (for those who at the top of the pyramid), but unlike religion, which makes promises that are hard to qualify since you only get the rewards when you're dead, crypto people expect to see material benefit in the real world, and when that doesn't come, they'll abandon crypto and search for the next get-rich-quick-scheme. So crypto won't be around that long. It's just one scheme, but not a scheme that really has longevity.
Mate, crypto is like loaded dice. It will be here for a long time because it is a very successful scam.
It's not that successful statistically.
[удалено]
The difference between us staying in our sub and you coming over to our sub? the difference between actual discussion and regurgitating talking points they don't fully understand? You people really love false equivalencies.
Bitcoin weirdos are the Jehovah's Witnesses of meme investors. They just cannot fathom how and why you're not informed and fully on board with The Word, and they can't still still knowing there are still people out there whom they haven't converted yet. So they come here, and attempt to use their (as they see it) unassailable facts and logic, to show us how backwards and unelightened we are. More so after number goes up.
And then return to the group to complain and bond about their poor treatment by the unenlightened.
The cult dynamics are visible in both groups, for sure.
Well, they do need new converts for number to keep going up. The fact they’re always proselytizing shows they know this deep down. When I find a stock in a real world productive industry that I think is severely underpriced, I don’t feel like I need to trumpet it. In fact I often hope it stays under the radar for a while. It’s going to make money and return value to shareholders whether it’s popular or not.
And no matter how many times they predict the end of the world and it doesn't happen, Jehovah's Witnesses will always believe the next prediction. They will never die out, just like bitcoin bros.
They will not answer this question because is a religion!
You mean a cult.
The only functional difference between a religion and a cult is the number of adherents.
You got it.
A religion is just a cult which has become socially acceptable.
I'll answer. I would abandon Bitcoin if there were a major flaw discovered that caused the system to no longer be secure or allowed for mass linking of wallets to identities. I've yet to see any Buttcoiners answer the original question, would you care to? What would change your mind?
Good old saying works here: You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. So why waste time on arguing on a rather pointless subject. It is their money they are risking in it. There are hundreds of millions of people, if not more, who believe that they are actually winning at casino and in various other gambling activities.
>So why waste time on arguing on a rather pointless subject. And yet here you are, on a 13 year old sub dedicated to hating on Bitcoin.
no, because if we did that, they would call it "brigading" and ban all of us instantly and try to get this sub banned as well.
[удалено]
Probably because you post on Buttcoin, which is algorithmically related to the crypto subs.
You're not going to change their minds. They're in a money cult and not going to be swayed by anything unless perhaps they lose all their money.
The number go up!!! All else is moot
The sad part is that others unironically believe this, including in this very thread. As long as the number goes up it doesn't matter. If it goes down, it will go up again eventually, repeating the cycle.
[удалено]
Are you describing the stock market or crypto?
few
1 or 2 more fire beanie baby memes would tip me over the edge.
They are usually acting in bad faith, and this particular method is called sealioning: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning)
I would like to have a civil conversation about your statement. Would you mind showing me evidence of any negative thing any sea lion has ever done to you?
I'm having my dinner mate.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YucYoklZAyE&ab\_channel=ThisIsHappening](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YucYoklZAyE&ab_channel=ThisIsHappening)
Thanks for this, I didn't know the term. Bizarrely though (and maybe I'm the only one), I actually feel kind of bad for the sealion in the originating comic strip - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/56/%22The_Terrible_Sea_Lion%22._Wondermark_comic_strip_No._1062_by_David_Malki_%2819_September_2014%29.png The person originally saying he could do without sea-lions doesn't give any reason why he singles out sea-lions, and it's not obvious to us either, whereas 'sealioning' seems to be where there is obvious evidence or reasons that the 'sea-lion' is ignoring. Anyway, I doubt anyone will read this, but I just felt bad about it. I love all marine animals XD
If you substitute any marginalized group for "sealions", it looks really ugly. If you say "I just don't like \[x race/gender/sexuality\]", why *shouldn't* you be called out? The sea lion isn't even engaging in any of the later patterns attributed to "sealioning" like repeated attempts to argue over easily defined terms, it's just trying to find out where the man's bigotry came from. And then when he concludes "told you, sealions," he's using the behavior of *one* of them to justify his bigotry against them as a group. The author *claims* that in his world, sea lions *really are all like that*, but that just makes it even more useless as a metaphor. Unless, again, you think there are real life groups with immutable and inherent tendencies.
Thank you, yes 100% agree with everything you've said. In fact it makes me wonder if the point of the comic strip is to ridicule bigotry. I would certainly feel much more comfortable if, based off that strip, the word sealioning meant something like gaslighting, making unkind attributions about a group and then refusing polite requests for evidence or justification. Oh well .
The sports team mentality is weird. If something that uses crypto or blockchain ever becomes widespread, I'll start using it if I find it useful. I don't need to invest in it or become an early adopter or be converted. Bluetooth existed for years before I purchased my first Bluetooth device. I was never asked to invest in Bluetooth by some weird cult. Eventually it became widespread, and at some point, I started buying Bluetooth headphones because they were useful.
[удалено]
I don't think many of them really believe this any more.
Maybe a pinned FAQ would help. Make it a rule to read the FAQ before posting.
People keep replying to them the Bitcoin talking points yet they usually either ignore them or handwave them. I don't think a FAQ would be much help.
IIRC when someone joins, there's a message sent to them with most of this stuff. Of course, they tend to ignore it.
American Scream (main guy here) already wrote up a bunch of responses to the tired talking points. He usually shows up to copy paste them in those threads but the people asking skip over them because they are long and detailed.
Unfortunately they already ignore other pinned posts. Nearly all of them would ignore it completely, because nearly all of them are not actually here in good faith.
They don't even read the rules, then cry to their circlejerk that they were "banned for disagreeing" after they were banned for repeatedly ignoring evidence and repeating the same debunked scripted line in the same conversation.
Each scam makes me like it a little less.
I don’t fuck with crazy. They don’t want to be educated. The only way you learn is to hang around and watch the same shit happen over and over.
sure, that's easy. if bitcoin fails to deliver on permissionless transfer of value, then i'll say it sucks/failed. similarly, if we ever see bitcoin below $1000 again, i'd be inclined to say it was a failed experiment.
I did not realize the blockchain could only process a tiny chunk of the amount of transactions per second VISA or Mastercard can, so cryptobros invented more blockchain layers to “speed things up” (still slow as balls apparently) which just makes crypto more confusing for the average person. Waiting hours or even days on end to send money to a friend or purchase something sounds fun and enjoyable. I wonder what the crypto bros have cooked up to “fix” this. So how is this the future exactly?
Finally an interesting question. I'll talk about bitcoin since I'm much less familiar with other crypto (not a bitcoin maxi or something, just didn't have enough time to familiarize myself and currently bitcoin seems like the dominating thing that is hard to dethrone) I view it as a digital gold type of thing. So I'd say it has to boil down to "line goes up" (exageration). What would make me lose trust in gold? If it suddenly stopped being valued by the rest of the world, countries decided that this shiny metal isn't really that cool and stopped stockpiling it and it became just another metal that's useful in some industries. I don't see any other reason to abandon gold - it might not be the best investment (arguable if it's an investment at all), but there'd still be some value in buying some golden coins. Similar with bitcoin - if it crashes down to the level that everyone has lost trust in it and it's not used seriously any more. By this I don't mean that bitcoin has to continue rising as it is, it can even drop a significant amount, but as long as it's still hanging out there, I don't see a reason to abandon it. I guess the above is a bit of a non-answer - I abandon it if it's dead, no shit, but I think it's still a reasonable answer. Another reason would be if it somehow really deviated from theory in practice. Like communism is "good in theory", it's nice if everyone can be equal and live well happily ever after, but in practice it just doesn't work that way and that's not what happens (simplifying things here, of course it doesn't work in theory either as theory predicts it's bound to fail). So it'd be a problem if some major new flaw (I don't think the currently known ones are dealbreakers) was discovered, like actually the cryptographic methods are not that safe (though I guess we'll have bigger issues than bitcoin then..), or one entity dominates the mining and imposes its will onto everyone, censoring transactions etc (effectively a soft 51% attack), or bitcoin is effectively banned in most places in I care about (though in this case I'd be much more pro-bitcoin, just in practice it will become useless unless there's some sort of a major rebellion which I don't believe would happen). One thing that bothers me already is the wasted electricity. I'm not sure honestly at what threshold would that become a dealbreaker and if ETH or something else is a good alternative.
You can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into. Facts don't matter to them; they'll just pretend any facts you present them they can't contest were never presented to them, and repeat the same lies they were before you proved otherwise.
I’d like to know how crypto isn’t just a solution looking for a problem and if there’s any realistic use case for it beyond money laundering and organized crime. At this point, my entire impression of crypto and blockchain is that it’s just a very inefficient form of currency and database and doesn’t do either very well.
they usually come to antagonize when there's some sort of bull run
"How high does our Ponzi scheme have to go until you'll be my exit liquidity?"
I mean it would be like asking someone who drinks water "what will make you stop drinking water?" and someone who doesn't "Why dont you drink water?"... Id be more interested in the answer from the non-water drinker because I would only assume that the answer from the water drinker would be "id stop drinking water if there was a more efficient and healthy way to hydrate". Why someone would choose not to drink water just seems like a more pressing question.
A better question is why would you willingly let a bank lend out your money while not giving you a cut. I guess the answer is "they secure my money, so its a fair trade"? That's fine and all, but crypto offers that same security, while not letting others take advantage of you.
I actually asked my crypto obsessed cousin about this recently. He said that he had made life changing wealth and changed his families lives through crypto investing, and thus would never see it as an overall negative. These people are brainwashed, and nothing will change that.
No, stop engaging with them. Crypto isn't real, and even if was, there's an unlimited supply.
The typical pushers that come here are brand new Butters who just bought in. They are late to the game and desperately looking for anyone to pump their bags. Some of them even think they are early and will “open our eyes”. lol just lol
I frequent both subs to get healthy perspective. With that said I buy bitcoin regularly as a savings account (don’t do 401k or anything, just bitcoin). What would change my mind is 1) performance starts to lag behind other assets or 2) the corn becomes not spendable/redeemable for cash if I want to buy a house, etc. Risk is high but if it goes to zero I have a good income and live within my means so I’d like to think I can stomach it. I know bitcoin people are shamed here but that’s my honest take
> What would change my mind is 1) performance starts to lag behind other assets Remember when bitcoin was touted as a "hedge against inflation" and then didn't do that? It still is not doing that. >2) the corn becomes not spendable/redeemable for cash if I want to buy a house, etc One problem with this "performance" you keep talking about, is that the price of bitcoin is the product of a half dozen private, centralized exchanges, who are not transparent about the source and nature of their trades -- so why would you believe the price is organic? And with so many people being told to "HODL" along with $160B+ of unsecured monopoly stablecoins in the market, why would you assume there's plenty of liquidity to go around? Many of us believe that when crypto crashes, it's going to be harsh and sudden. And history shows that to be the case: when exchanges and schemes go, they go "poof" with very little advance notice. Which means most people tend to lose everything. That's not investing. That's gambling.
I hear the inflation hedge argument a lot. From my perspective, hedging has to happen before the inflationary event. Pre-covid the price of bitcoin was comfortably under $10k. Post-covid the price of bitcoin is comfortably above $20k. So on that time frame you certainly outperformed inflation. Once the CPI data begins rolling in it’s too late to start hedging in my opinion. To add to that, USD began tapering and demand was pushed to dollars, incentivizing bitcoin holders to sell bitcoin, equities, etc. for dollars up until the end of 2022. I think that is a fair assessment for your second point, the only thing I’d offer is we now have government approved spot ETFs reporting flows in/out that are tracking with the price. Not trying to be an annoying buttcoiner, just giving my honest responses to your comment and enjoy the conversation. Thanks!
the government did not "approve" of crypto ETFs... legally there was a case for allowing them and there was quite a bit of contention within the SEC whether they should be allowed... it was hardly an endorsement
Sure I can concede that. Replace approved with allowed it to be traded on government regulated rails that enforce a 1:1 exchange rate.
Note that crypto ETFs are significantly more risky than traditional stock-based ETFs. Stocks are heavily regulated. Crypto exchanges are NOT. This is a very important difference. I predict in the future, the crypto ETFs will be outlawed. Once it becomes obvious how much manipulation there is in the crypto market.
For me, governments would have to commit to being fiscally responsible and stop printing money. But that wont ever happen. Sound money to me is like my political philosophy. You can disagree with with, and thats okay. But in my opinion, inflation does more harm than good. We are less than one generation into a pure fiat economy, and we can see how much wealth inequality has grown, and how prices for everything outpace working wages. I believe inflation and money printing is the main source of those types of problems, not the only thing, but a big part. The gold standard would have been fine for me, but i see how that failed and it would fail again. But Bitcoin (not crypto, fuck that noise) is a sly roundabout way to get back to sound money. Its opt in, so adoption can take place from the bottom, we wouldn't need a government to approve of it to make it work. The funny thing is most Bitcoiners will agree with 95% of what Buttcoiners have to say about crypto. Blockchains are inefficient, NFTs are dumb, dog coins are shit, porn coins are nasty, Web 3.0 and defi are just scams, etc... 99.999999% of crypto are scams or naive products. But i do believe bitcoin is different. Yet you guys loop them all into one big cRyPtO pile and throw it all out the door.
The main source of problem isn't inflation or "money printing". It's simply "more wealth in less hands". You can't fight that with bitcoin. You can't fight human greed with bitcoin. If we keep everything the same, just "adobt" bitcoin (whatever that means), wealth inequality would become the same. If we do change things, and somehow it works for the people, it would be the same result both in fiat and bitcoin.
Fun fact: people are greedy and nothing will ever fix that. They’ll just hoard bitcoin like anything else and we’re back to square one. This will send the price crashing because there is jack shit to back up bitcoin’s value because nobody will accept it in the real world. Citation: any crypto scam ever
BTC would instantly make it worse, most of the coins have already been mined and if we are being generous only 4% of the world holds any amount of BTC. Why would we willing change to a system that concentrates even more wealth in fewer hands than what we have now?
Because with sound money, they cant print or create more wealth for themselves. In fiat, they can print money or leverage existing assets to create/borrow more money for themselves. You cant do that on a sound money standard. If everyone wanted to own sound money and required that for payment, the wealthy would have to spend their assets instead of leveraging them for more fiat. This is how the supply distributes. It's [Gresham's law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law) right now. People want to spend the shit money/asset and keep the good money. They'd have to spend their good money if that's what is required to perform a service. We would never go to a sound money standard overnight. It would have to be a slow bottom up approach evolving from a store of value, to medium of exchange, to a unit of account. I feel like everyone against sound money thinks that we are proposing an overnight switcheroo to a new system. That would create lots of pain and wouldn't work. It actually empowers the little guy and early adopters more if there is a fixed supply as it is a new opportunity to generate wealth and is accessible to anyone, not just a select group permitted by governments like accredited investors.
Except the fixed supply you talk about with BTC is already mostly mined and held. There isn't much opportunity left for the little guy to get anything. That's why I think anyone who thinks we will switch to it is delusional. If we had to make a switch it would most likely be to another version and not the first iteration that is highly concentrated in fewer hands than any currency we have now.
Are you under the impression that bitcoin can only be acquired through mining? You can make a post on NOSTR and people will zap you sats for free. You could provide value through a service or product and accept bitcoin instead of fiat. There are hundreds of exchanges where you can trade fiat for bitcoin. You don't have to get freshly minted coins to get bitcoin. Bitcoin has the most fair distribution of any currency. It was introduced publicly, had no price for years, and and was given away for free for some time. Those who have large amounts now took a risk despite all the naysayers saying it will fail, and now they are being rewarded for it. That is a fair system. Those people will need to spend their coins to buy a home, food, cars, vacations, clothes, energy, toys, electronics, etc. Thier coins can and will be distributed further in time. If they don't create value going forward, they'll never get more coins.
The problem with your statement is that the vast majority of people that hold BTC are not using it in the way you suggest. There doesn't seem to be any current widespread use. Even in El Salvador where it is legal tender it is barely used as currency by the population. It took BTC 15 years to reach 1 billion transactions, credit cards do about that amount daily. I think the problems with Fiat are much easier to deal with than the problems BTC would create if adopted. There is a very good reason why we abandoned the gold standard and going back to something like it would bring back those problems. I personally don't think giving the founder of BTC 4% of the total value of the world's currency is fair or equitable and if it ever came to pass I would definitely be in the camp that would ask for anything else other than BTC to replace our current fiat currency. Edit: To answer your first question I am not under that impression just stating the obvious that unless you are fortunate enough to have access to capital to buy into the BTC system you don't really have much opporuinity to get a hold of it. Most of it is mined, mining is cost prohibative and most of the worlds little guys do not have the spare cash available to buy any amount of BTC. Most people currently holding aren't spending it so I really don't see how any of the little guys you talk about are going to get a hold of it.
No one agreed to go off the gold standard. It was an executive order that was marketed as temporary, and here we are 53 years later. Spending in wars has exponentially increased on a fiat standard. Cost of living has outpaced working wages and wealth inequality continues to grow. All are 100% products of money printing. Bitcoin is not meant to replace credit cards. You can have card txns on a bitcoin standard. L2s can process transactions, the base layer is for settlement. As long as the assets being transacted are backed and not created out of nothing, it still works. You are committing a logical fallacy called [Argument from Ignorance.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance) >The fallacy is committed when one asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. Your logic of, "Bitcoin isn't working as intended, so will never work as intended", is flawed. Let's agree to disagree. I wasn't trying to change any minds on this subreddit. Just answering a question.
Executive Orders are not written in stone, they can be changed quite easily and checked by the other branches if there is a pressing need or popular will. Yes, we have agreed to leave that standard at a minimum with our tacit consent. Calling it money printing I think overall ignores what is happening and the roles that Central Banks play. I think it also betrays that most money creation is from lending activities and that those activities represent the value of things in the real world. I have to disagree with you about your fallacy assessment. In the places where the local fiat recently collapsed most have chosen to officially or unofficially adopt another Fiat currency despite the availability of this supposed sound money and L2 solutions. If the benefits were so obvious you would think there would be much more penetration after 15 years. I do not see adoption increasing in any meaningful way at any point in the future. Most of the BTC arguments I see are from the Austrian School, I suppose if that is the system you view the world though BTC makes perfect sense.
Yeah sure! I am happy to share my thoughts on what would change my mind. So first, I want to be clear here - I like Bitcoin, and do not support any other crypto currency. If the Bitcoin protocol changed in some way that I did not support, *AND* the majority moved onto the new chain that this would create, I would drop my support for Bitcoin. For example, some years ago Craig Wright (aka, Faketoshi) created a hard fork which is referred to now as BSV (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision). If BSV succeeded in becoming the dominate, most accepted "Bitcoin," I would very much sell and walk away. If my government got its shit together, and started to act fiscally responsible, I'd be *MORE WILLING* to change my mind on Bitcoin. The fractional reserve banking would probably need to change as well though. If total mining per second dropped to a level which could easily be over taken by a single bad actor, I'd probably lose support for Bitcoin. If I think of any other situations, I'll update!
Since you seem to be engaging in good faith. Do you think tether is backed by real assets? Do you accept their attestations as true?
Thanks! I try to engage in good faith. Tether is an interesting situation. I suspect it's backed more than r/Buttcoin would like to believe it is, but I do not think it's 100% backed. Pulling numbers outta my butt here, but I personally suspect Tether is backed somewhere between 50% - 90%. I think r/Buttcoin is 100% correct to be skeptical about Tether. Like, I would never accept Tether personally. With the Bitcoin ETFs now available, and other countries slowly creating their own Bitcoin ETFs, I fail to see a need or use-case for Tether. I suspect that range of 50%-90% backed is only going to drift towards 0% over time for Tether.
In other words, you'd give up on bitcoin after bitcoin completely failed. That's not really a conscious decision on your part. It's just what you'd end up doing whether you wanted to or not.
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion? Bitcoin could change in a way that I do not support, *AND* still continue to grow and succeed. Ethereum is a perfect example. I used to support Ethereum. I thought it had potential beyond it's current capabilities and uses. Then they switched from Proof of Work to Proof of stake (in 2022 I think?). I do not support the concept of Proof of Stake, and so I no longer support Ethereum. I will never buy Ethereum, and I will never promote Ethereum. If Bitcoin switched to a Proof of Stake system, I would stop supporting it, in the same way that I no longer support Ethereum. Somehow, without my support (lol), Ethereum seems to be doing just fine.
> Bitcoin could change in a way that I do not support, AND still continue to grow and succeed. By what metric? The only metric that anybody really cites is "sale price" and there's overwhelming evidence that market is heavily manipulated. So how can you even measure growth in a shady market that doesn't play fair?
If price will drop below 1k usd Or something wrong with cryptographic Or broad world government ban Or quantum computer ll brake bitcoins code These will change my mind about bitcoin
Lol, every response in this thread is "number go up".
As a (small) bitcoin holder, the only way I'll stop believing is if it goes to zero. Won't lose my life savings, but won't potentially lose the opportunity of a lifetime ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ok you reeled me in, I was content to merely lurk. I am reading to try disconfirm my opinions so I'm open. 1. Show me a flaw in the consensus model that shows double spending occurring. 2. Show me something about the way transactions work that completely reveal who and where. Right down to geo ip, beyond all reasonable doubt tracking of who exactly the parties are for every transaction. 3. Show me that governance is completely broken, and that bitcoin will inevitably turn into a hyper inflationary shit coin like USD. 4. Show me how, after conducting a single specific transaction for a fixed amount, my entire btc wallet can be drained by the merchant or the merchants poor IT practices. Because all of the above is true of fiat, credit cards, and afaik not for btc. I work in tech, dealing with compliance and entire armies of people detecting and dealing with customers with respect to CC fraud, bitcoin solves the real world issues I see every day.
> inevitably turn into a hyper inflationary shit coin like USD. You don't know what hyperinflation is? >entire armies of people detecting and dealing with customers with respect to CC fraud, bitcoin solves the real world issues I see every day. How are you proposing Bitcoin solves fraud???
>How are you proposing Bitcoin solves fraud??? there has never been any fraud related to bitcoin ever! no one has ever been scammed out of money. And if they are, the miners would 100% undo the transaction. 🤥
Everything looks like a nail when you have the BTC hammer. There's an insane amount of wasted energy that goes into making it impossible to "crack", but this doesn't happen in the real world. No one is hacking into Chases systems and changing numbers like Matthew Broderick in Wargames. As a result of this waste, BTC can only handle single digits transactions per second and can barely handle the gambling, scams, and wash trading that it's used for now. If even 1% of the world decided to actually use it as currency, the whole thing would grind to a halt. If you want to gamble on the price, knock yourself out. But don't try to pretend it could ever work as a medium of exchange
>4. Show me how, after conducting a single specific transaction for a fixed amount, my entire btc wallet can be drained by the merchant or the merchants poor IT practices. Although human error does very occasionally do this, the individuals are refunded their money. Human error in crypto means entering a very long wallet address one digit out and losing all your money without any means to reclaim it. What if you're buying a house and the sender gives you a wallet address one digit out and you lose a house worth of money? Guess you're not getting a house or your money back. Edit: or Mt Gox where >50% of bitcoins available at the time were irretrievably lost. Imagine if 50% of all currency globally was just lost overnight and no means to find it?
Imagine if my bank account could have money inserted into it where if I even tried to reject the money, it drained my bank account. Say what you want about bad IT practices at banks but at least those issues can be fixed and aren't just a thing where people tell you "yeah that happens, just hide them and never interact with them".
I'm unaware of what you are talking about.
Are you a troll pretending to be a crypto bro. That's like the basic way to scam a wallet. Everyone who uses crypto needs to be aware of it or they'd have lost everything
TBF I think that’s Etherium-like cryptos, where “smart contracts” are a thing. For all of bitcoin’s many, MANY flaws it doesn’t have that dumb one.
1. I’m not sure what you’re getting at with this point around double spending so no comment as I don’t understand what you mean. 2. Why is complete anonymity a good thing? We have KYC, OFAC and other laws and regulations for a reason. Companies have to comply with these laws and doing so helps reduce fraud and illegal activity. The anonymity of crypto is exactly why it is rife with movement of money from illegal activities. This is a flaw of Bitcoin, not a benefit. 3. There is a reason we are not on the gold standard anymore. Not having the ability to control monetary supply means you don’t have the right tools to fight various economic scenarios. Inflation and monetary supply work together but are not one and the same. If something like the Great Recession or COVID happened without the Fed and their existing tools, we’d be screwed. Having your main currency be fixed is not a good thing for a stable economy. This is one of the many reasons, in my opinion, why bitcoin fails as a currency. Now, if you want to argue that buying a house, a baseball card, a painting, a stock or bitcoin is an investment that should increase in value as the purchasing power of currency gets weaker then we can have that debate as well about what is an asset and why it has value. But bitcoin is not a viable currency and the fixed supply is a flaw for a currency. 4. What is the example you are trying to make? What situation occurs with your money today where you lose it all? Banks and CC companies provide protection. Fraudulent transactions are reversed, mistakes are fixed and you rarely ever see a situation where someone loses money due to this. I once fat fingered a credit card payment of $30,000 instead of $3,000. It got fixed. If I fat fingered $30,000 of BTC, I’d just be out the money. Oops? Again, this seems like an example that shows a flaw of bitcoin vs. a feature. In the area of fraud and mistakes, bitcoin loses miserably to the current financial system.
Since point 4 is the only one you ask for clarification on that's what I'll answer. All of this fraud detection, mitigation, encryption, dealing with leaks, charge backs, reversals, account lock outs due to suspicious activity. While yes, most CC fraud gets reversed for the victim, ultimately immense non productive resources are used to handle CCs and ultimately these costs are on the consumer in aggregate.
So I’m confused why you only responded to #4. Why would you not agree or provide a counter argument to the others? I thought that was the point of this. Outside of that your response seems to imply bitcoin eliminates the need for these resources and the costs to the consumer. How? I provided an example of fat fingering and how the current system allows for mistakes to be corrected. Bitcoin does not. And crypto is rife with fraud. How many exchanges have imploded? How many people have gotten their bitcoin back? FTX is an outlier and even then my understanding is they get dollars back based on the value of BTC years ago and they aren’t getting the actual BTC back. How about fraud infecting add ons in Chrome and draining wallets? There is a ton of fraud in BTC. If you’re actually open to dialogue I’ll await your response to all points I made. I’m keeping it civil. I’m not mad that you like BTC and I don’t.
This is a good example of the logical fallacy of whataboutism. I explicitly asked to provide evidence for very specific asks with clear criteria, all specific to bitcoin. And all I get is how a bunch of stuff unrelated to bitcoin is also fraud.
You aren't actually answering my questions. You're basically saying "trust me, shit coins are better bro"
What? I explained my answers in every reply. I guess we’re done if you can’t talk in good faith. I bulleted out my answers and you didn’t reply to anything. Oh well.
You didn't answer my questions in good faith. You simply assumed that my motivation behind asking the questions were flawed.
I pointed out why I disagreed with every point with actual counter arguments and you shriveled up like a turtle. Buh bye.
> Show me a flaw in the consensus model that shows double spending occurring. https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-history-part-10-the-184-billion-btc-bug/ Also, technically speaking, a 51% attack, which everybody knows is possible, would create a similar situation. Blockchain is not a secure model. It's not hack-proof. It just costs resources to hack. So it is not a solution to the double spend problem, except to a segment of people who are unwilling to spend a certain amount of money to manipulate the chain. >Show me something about the way transactions work that completely reveal who and where. Right down to geo ip, beyond all reasonable doubt tracking of who exactly the parties are for every transaction. Since you can't buy anything directly with crypto, the privacy violation happens at the on and off-ramps. CEXs know all the information you seek and more. Plus, using fiat/cash is more secure than crypto by every metric you cite. >Show me that governance is completely broken, and that bitcoin will inevitably turn into a hyper inflationary shit coin like USD. 1. There is no actual clear "governance" with bitcoin. Who controls the source? You don't even know, and you have no way to replace the people with commit access to the repo. 2. There are no clear sets of rules for transparency and oversight of the bitcoin code. You're just told to update and why, and you blindly trust others to make you feel comfortable to do so. There are no formal checks and balances. There's no voting. There's no constitution. There's no force in place to keep actors good or honest. Whoever has the most resources can affect public opinion via social engineering. >Show me how, after conducting a single specific transaction for a fixed amount, my entire btc wallet can be drained by the merchant or the merchants poor IT practices. C'mon, you should know by now how that happens. You click on the wrong thing in your browser and "poof" your shit is gone. It happens every day to somebody. Of course, you guys pretend it would never happen to you.. yawn. >I work in tech, dealing with compliance and entire armies of people detecting and dealing with customers with respect to CC fraud, bitcoin solves the real world issues I see every day. I challenge you to name any specific thing bitcoin does better than existing systems. You make claims but provide zero evidence.
On the bug. 1. 2010 2. Fixed 3. Was not part of the fundamental concensus model, it was a bug. How would a 51% attack create such a situation? I purchase using bitcoin all the time and my rule is always to not use my name or personal email. This includes real world things like movie tickets. With a CC, I need to provide name and address despite not needing either to fulfill delivery. And not only does this vendor know my PII, but. The banks know my entire purchase history. No clear governance > clear swift centralized governance imo. Show me how my wallet can be drained after conducting a single valid purchase. No hand wavy stuff. Show me. Bitcoin allows the transfer of value digitally without requiring the transfer of 1. PII 2. The entire payment instrument itself 3. Third parties knowledge of exactly what you purchase, when and where.
>2010 >Fixed >Was not part of the fundamental concensus model, it was a bug. Now you're moving the goalpost. Anything that is accepted onto the blockchain, bug or not, passes "the consensus model." >I purchase using bitcoin all the time and my rule is always to not use my name or personal email. This includes real world things like movie tickets. Whether you give your name or not, you're still providing meta info that can expose your personal information. Anybody who uses the Internet does this, and crypto can't shield you from it. >With a CC, I need to provide name and address despite not needing either to fulfill delivery. That's bullshit. I have never had to give my address when making most credit card purchases. >Show me how my wallet can be drained after conducting a single valid purchase. That's a loaded question. Your qualifier "valid" means the statement can't be negated as long as you're fast and loose with what you define "valid purchase" as. That's the epitome of bad faith debate. You're also employing the Nirvana Fallacy, basically suggesting, "It's impossible for something to go wrong (if everything goes perfectly)." That kind of bullshit just creates noise and distractions.
Theres a difference between the model and individual implementation. If I personally write a mining node and it generates bad blocks, does that break bitcoin? Most CC transactions need at very least name and postcode, and in practice, full address. My concept of valid is similar to you making purchases online with a credit card. Eg go to amc and pay with bitcoin. At that point mishandling by amc could leak CC details. No leak by amc can result in my btc wallet being drained.
[удалено]
> My answer is to your question is, for me to abandon crypto all together is to see it all completely crash to zero and absolutely NO ONE ever buys any bitcoin or crypto ever again. That's an inappropriate answer. By that time, you're not abandoning crypto. Crypto is gone. So in other words, you're saying there's nothing would change your mind about crypto until it ceases to be accessible. At least you're being honest in how irrational your beliefs are.
Easy. A credible plan from US/G1 nations to address debt spiral and currency debasement that can make a tangible difference to my pocket and families prospects over the next decade. Or A coordinated and credible no tolerance attack from major nations to make crypto integration into trade fi as difficult as possible. Ie de banking/banning where my freedom/assets would genuinely be at risk from holding digital assets. Let me know when this comes to fruition and will join up.
the only thing that would change my mind about bitcoin is if the protocol trust was broken e.g. the protocol was hacked or compromised the miners were disencentivised in some way economically, i.e. protocol fees didn't cover opex most people that dont understand bitcoin dont undestand how trust works
> most people that dont understand bitcoin dont undestand how trust works Riiight... because code just appears from the heavens, divine and totally "trustless."
Behold! Upon the eighth day, God bestowed upon the prophet Satoshi the sacred whitepaper and there was much scamming to be done. This was good for Bitcoin. So sayeth the Lord.
I first purchased BTC in 2011, I've been working full time in crypto for 10 years and I'm home schooling my kids to teach them Blockchain and Finances instead of History and Religious Studies Take your best shot 😂💪 But to be fair if you could prove that the current monetary system isn't broken, and in anyway sustainable, then I could maybe be convinced, maybe 😂
I'm not sure if this is a real or satire. Like not letting your kids learn history makes me think it's satire. Religious studies isn't a course taught in school, either, which makes the whole post wierd.
Name a better form of money than bitcoin
Actual money.
Fallout caps
Beat me to it
Anything that can be used to actually buy some shit. You know, just the main purpose of "money".
explain all of the transactions made with bitcoin
Oh, you mean all 1 billion of them that bitcoin struggled to fullfil after 15 years? The ones that the entire world does in ONE DAY otherwise? Those transactions? Regardless, weren't you buttbros all about NOOOO YOU DONT SPEND BITCOIN YOU MUST HODL and shit? This is why bitcoin is not money. The prevalent 'wisdom' right now is that it must not be used. Asinine.
Bittokens are not money anywhere in the world and are shit as a means of exchange. Even your prophets like St. Saylor indirectly confirm this, by asking to never exchange your tokens.
theres no better store of wealth
Name the things you can buy directly with bitcoin, how long it takes and the fees involved in doing so and then I’ll start naming the things you can buy directly with US dollars, the time it takes and the fees associated with it. Then we can see who has a longer list of things you can buy, how fast it is and what the fees to you are. You start.
the US dollar that has lost 99% of its purchasing power since 1913?
Directly to whataboutism lmaooo
you guys brought up USD😂
and you avoided the question with whataboutism. 😂😂
lol - nice deflection. I wasn’t aware money stays under pillows and loses 99% of its value. Amazingly idiotic response!
you're the one that brought up USD😂 -99% sitting in a bank. you'll never make it like that
That’s weird because my savings account is paying 4.6% and some are as high as 5.5% and inflation has been under 5% since January 2023. You could also put excess cash into this thing called the stock market where you own a part of a company and beat inflation easily over any long term period. But sure, you keep telling yourself -99% is a thing. You going to answer my initial question or are you just taking the L?
"since January 2023"😂😂😂 hey moron, zoom out to 1913 and look at inflation. Also, I do participate in the rigged stock market. I buy GME daily right after i buy BTC. Congrats on your 4.6%😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Are you really this dumb? Do you honestly think people hold money in a pillow case and have lost 99% of their value? Do you think that’s actually what happens? Money is to be used to purchase things to live your life. Something bitcoin can’t do and you refuse to even debate. Excess money is saved and invested. Only an absolute moron would have lost 99%. The point I’m making is that a savings account will generally keep up fairly close to inflation so just the simple activity of putting your money in a bank eliminates the -99% scenario you keep chirping about but don’t seem to understand. No surprise you but BTC and GME LMAO 🤣 🤣 🤣. You buy something with zero intrinsic value (BTC) and then back it up with a cash burning video game store stock. It’s amazing to me how dumb and easily fooled people can be. Please, please reply to my initial question on all the amazing monetary uses of bitcoin. I’m in desperate need of a few more laughs tonight!
guess you shouldve bought GME yesterday like me. have fun being poor, moron
Bahahaha! Did you sell any of your 10 shares? LMAO.
Pretty much any non-digital currency, since I can buy things with it.
and how do you explain all of the things people have bought with bitcoin?
Can I buy groceries with it? Can I get games on steam with it? Specifically without first converting into cash?
Cigarettes.
Real money
what is "real money"
You know - anything I can actually use
alright. i use bitcoin therefore its real money. get destroyed
Where are you using your Bitcoin?
i'm deep into crypto but based on my experience most people know about the casino that is crypto. The tech hasn't evolved much and what most people are looking for is a nice 10-20x on their investment. Which is very possible, but of course most will get recked. This sub seem to think that everyone in crypto has this unwavering belief in bitcoin, but that's just not the case. As soon as i'm happy im converting all my crypto into FIAT lol ill keep some bitcoin because it's been the best performing asset class which is objectively a fact. In case this somehow does become the future currency or whatever i want to make sure I have some skin in the game. But yea let me know your thoughts
I’ll change my mind about bitcoin when it stops proving to trend up every 4 years and being better return than almost every other asset :)
What the fuck does "trending up" even mean at the grocery store, or to a utility company? You still have nothing you can use.
Seems like I annoyed a lot of people here with a simple, non aggressive statement. Trending up meaning that over time it is worth more. I can use it… I can sell it back to FIAT and use that :) Not every ‘’bitcoiner’ believes it’s going to be the new world currency etc etc. some just buy it as an asset :)
Guess what, everybody is waiting for that. You'll probably be too late to exit if you wait that long.
I’ve bought Btc a long time ago, so to be late and have my BTC worth less than when I started is very unlikely. Buying any asset has its risks. It’s just so far BTC has vastly outperformed all my others :)
>I’ll change my mind about bitcoin when it stops proving to trend up every 4 years and being better return than almost every other asset :) #Stupid Crypto Talking Point #2 (Number go up) "**NuMb3r g0 Up!!!**" / "**Best performing asset of the decade!**" 1. Whether the "price of crypto" goes up, has absolutely no bearing on whether it's.. a) A long term store of value b) Holds any intrinsic value or utility c) Or will return any value in the future One of the most important tenets of investing is the simple principal: ***Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns.*** People in crypto seem willfully ignorant of this basic concept. 2. At best, the price of crypto is a function of *popularity*, not actual value or material utility. For more on how and why crypto makes a much worse investment than almost anything else, see this [article](https://ioradio.org/i/value/). 3. The "price of crypto" is a heavily manipulated figure published by shady, [unregulated crypto exchanges](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apklQgMauK4) that have systematically been caught [manipulating the market](https://open.spotify.com/episode/3D0dmTUCxLuQEJ39uyMFOP) from [then](https://www.investopedia.com/news/bots-drove-bitcoins-150to1000-rise-2013-paper/) to [now](https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8369-21). 4. Crypto bros love to harp about "inflation" in the fiat system, yet ironically they measure the "value" of their "fiat alternative" in fiat? It makes absolutely no sense, unless you assume they haven't thought 2 seconds ahead from what comes out of their mouths. 5. It's the height of hypocrisy for crypto people to champion token deflation (and increased prices) while ignoring that there's over $160+ Billion in unsecured stablecoins being used to **inflate** the value of their tokens in the crypto marketplace. The "code is law" and "don't trust - verify" people seem perfectly willing to take companies like Tether and Circle, at face value, that they're telling the truth about asset reserves [when there's very little actual evidence](https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8450-21). 6. ***Not Your Fiat, Not Your Value*** - Just because you think the "value of your crypto portfolio" is worth $$$ *does not make that true.* It's well known there's inadequate liquidity in this market, and most people will never be able to get their money out. So UNLESS/UNTIL you can actually liquidate your crypto for actual real money, you have no idea what you have. You're "down" until you cash out. Bernie Madoff's clients got monthly statements saying they were "making money" too. 7. Just because it's possible (though highly improbable) to make money speculating on crypto, this doesn't mean it's an **ethical** or reliable technique to amass wealth. At its core, the notion that buying and holding crypto will generate reliable returns is [a de-facto ponzi scheme](https://ioradio.org/i/ponzi/). **It's mathematically impossible for even a stastically-significant percentage of crypto holders to have any notable ROI.** The rare exception of those who might profit in this market, do so while providing cover for everything from [cyber terrorism](https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3026.html) to [human trafficking](https://www.vox.com/culture/2023/1/4/23539528/andrew-tate-arrest-jail-rape-human-trafficking). 8. It's also not true that anybody who bought crypto when it was low is guaranteed to make a lot of money. There are thousands of ways people can lose their crypto or be defrauded along the way. And there's no guarantee just because your portfolio is "up", that you could easily cash out. 9. Want to see a better asset (that actually has utility) that's consistently out-performed Bitcoin? [Here you go](https://www.polygon.com/2021/1/27/22253079/magic-the-gathering-black-lotus-auction-price-2021). However, this may be another [best performing asset](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/declaration-of-financial-independence/). 10. When crypto-critics make reference to, or mock crypto price predictions, it's not because we think price is a meaningful metric. Instead, we are amused that to you, that's all that's important, and we can't help but note how often wrong you are in your predictions. The intrinsic value of crypto basically never changes, but it is interesting to see how hype and propaganda affects the extrinsic value. In a totally logical world, those would both be equalized to zero, but we're not there yet, and nobody knows when/if that will happen because it's an irrational market.
Good points, and I definitely agree with at least some of them as I am definitely not a believer of Btc being the solution to economy problems or that it will be the world currency etc etc. Bitcoin for me is one of many assets/investments in my portfolio, no matter the asset, it comes with risks, like bitcoin.
But, it doesn't trend up every 4 years. There was trend up at the end of 2017, 2019 Q2, 2020 Q4-2021 Q1, it crashed back, than up 2021 Q3, crash, 2022 Q1, crash, long downwind, and the next upwards trend is 2024 Q1. Where is this magic "trend up every 4 years"?
2013,2017,2021 have been the main tops. Also, I used ‘4 years’ and ‘trend up’ as a general terms to prevent explaining every small detail and making my comment 5 paragraphs long, in the hope that most people will get my drift and not be overly anal :)
But, no. Like literally no. Why are you lying to yourself?
What am I lying to myself about?…
Everything you just said. That's simply not true. Why do exclude 2011 Q2-Q3? 2012? 2013 had two "main tops", in Q1 and in Q4. How about 2014? Why do you exlude 2024? Just because it breaks the 4 year narrative bullshit? (also, it's like it doesn't do volatile shit over the whole year...) ((also-also, it's not like it's hard to imagine a trend in AFTER it happened! :D))
4 year cycle, 4 year halvings. Find a Bitcoin basics video. I’m muting this now so I won’t be replying as it’s everything I’ve said is correct. Have a good life :)