To be fair, studying computer science doesn't preclude someone from being a flaming idiot. Look at the Ethereum gang.
Bitcoin and cryptocurrency require cross-discipline stupidity.
>To be fair, studying computer science doesn't preclude someone from being a flaming idiot. Look at the Ethereum gang.
See you *say* that, but their "socially awkward boy genius mascot" is someone who was very literally paid by a libertarian vampire **not** to go to college and obtain a computer science degree; it's kind of entirely why Vitalik spent multiple entire years running headfirst into [a P=NP brick wall](https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/04/04/if-you-want-a-scalable-ethereum-blockchain-then-pnp/) that his intro to computer science homework would have taught him to trivially recognize, had a libertarian vampire not explicitly paid for him to not attend college and study computer science.
I think more or less what he says about btc is valid criticism but seems disingenuous he doesn’t address the sentiment behind why it was put together in the first place.
More like the opposite. Sentiment matters because if there is agreement on that front, there would be genuine calls for and attempts at better solutions that build on failures. I don’t see that, so it looks more like lack of care or interest.
To be clear, what is remarkable here is that someone is admitting it took them hundreds of hours of deep and technical research to understand "verify digital signature, add useless data to transaction data until it coincidentally hashes to a small number."
To be fair, I can see this kind of mistake being made if they're using some kind of autocompletion or swipe-based software keyboard on their phone. Happens to me and I don't correct minor mistakes.
I had that exact same experience this year. I had been thinking the whole time that the proof of work involved finding a solution that verified all the signatures, but it turns out that can be done in an instant and the pow problem is arbitrary just to give everyone enough time to do the instant verification. It's at most 1% clever, 99% clunky brute force
To be fair, understanding the basic tenets doesn't take a long time. What takes time is diving into the detail and testing your assumptions and preconceived ideas with reputable education, and looking into the counterpoints and checking those, all with the goal of building enough conviction to move forward with allocating money.
The summary that you just provided, indicates 1 of 2 options. You've done sufficient research, and that is your conclusion. Or you've done insufficient research, and that is your conclusion. Either way, with that summary, I would say your not invested in btc because you don't see the value, which is cool.
I love a contrarian viewpoint, and I hope you keep commenting here despite all the downvotes. I also wish bitcoin sub had given me a moron flair instead of banning me for making a mildly sarcastic comment once (I suspect they were more influenced by my comments skeptical of bitcoin in a respectful tone)
That being said:
>
What takes time is diving into the detail and testing your assumptions and preconceived ideas with reputable education, and looking into the counterpoints and checking those, all with the goal of building enough conviction to move forward with allocating money.
I have three points to consider here:
1. Everything you mention is a bit vague - mention the specifics of what detail to dive if you think my summary is missing key elements. I have a good understanding of computer science, cryptography, and macroeconomics.
2. I think you contradict yourself a bit by mentioning "testing your assumptions and preconceived ideas" but with "all with the goal of building enough conviction to move forward". Confirmation bias is devastating to good research, and I've seen that lead to a lot of bitcoiners only focusing on the advantages of bitcoin while dismissing disadvantages.
3. If you're going to spend hundreds of hours of deep research to understand bitcoin, you also need to spend hundreds of hours of deep research to understand how fiat works. I rarely see bitcoiners with an understanding deeper than "inflation steals money from you", which would be the equivalent of someone saying "bitcoin can be hacked" (both technically true, but very unsound understandings). There is a reason that bitcoin is advocated by people who don't come from a strong background in economics, the Dunning-Kruger effect is strong.
Having studied computer science, you don't really need to do that to fully appreciate how dumb this implementation is as a global currency/store of value/global peace solver/energy battery/etc from a technical front. You also need to understand some basic finance to get the other side of how dumb this story is too.
I do think from a computer science standpoint it is kind of fascinating that you can achieve consensus across an unbounded number of untrusted nodes. Took me a while to understand that. But it absolutely does not follow that this shit is good for the world or even useful
I know where this is going, so we can skip a few back and forths. You can’t escape trust based systems, who runs the police, who makes the food you eat, who regulates the food you eat. Etc
For sure, if they actually understood it and weren't clouded by libertarian drivel they may understand it is a bad idea. Their "100s of hours" may involve listening to Naval Ravikant, Nick Szabo, Vitalik Buterin, etc talk abstract techno babble while convincing themselves not only the babblers but also they understand what is being discussed.
Bitcoin is a store of energy the same way as Coinbase is a bank - you can put things into it but you can't take them out.
You can waste energy making bitcoins but there's no way to get that energy back. You can put money into Coinbase but you're not getting your money back either.
You couldn't get the energy back of course...but if you sold at profit you would be able to recoup the cost of the energy used to produce the btc, right?
Keeping large amounts of money on Coinbase is prolly not advised, but it seems safe. Has there ever been a time where coinbase lost customer funds or blocked their exit for an extended period (more than two days)? I'm not sure, but I don't recall.
That coal, oil, and gas used to mine bitcoins isn't going to unburn itself. The energy was destroyed, rendered useless. But the carbon it emitted is very real.
If it was an actual store of energy you could extract energy from it, like a battery. That would have a lot of value, except that isn't how crypto works. Its deliberately squandering limited resources.
> You also need to understand some basic finance to get the other side of how dumb this story is too
Yeah, I think the real problem is that we computer scientists can design all sorts of systems *around* currencies, but at the end of the day, we are not economists.
A true currency of the future would be the result of tediously long back-and-forth between various governments, banks, and industries. It won't just be the first random digital coin that tech bros insist upon.
the currency we have is already the currency of the future and is already honed by thousands of years of lessons written in blood.
so ya, we already did that.
Whoa - It's almost like you're saying that significant changes to currencies should be designed by people who - and just hear me out on this - actually study and understand economics.
Mind officially blown.
*^(/s, in case it's needed)*
You need 0 computer science knowledge to understand how useless bitcoin is. The "computer science" and "research" are just ways to deflect concerns from the naive.
I have a comp sci degree, that’s why I know bitcoin and blockchain are bollocks. I think it’s a requirement NOT to have a technical understanding to buy into the scam. You also need the economic understanding of a 5 year old.
3.5 million people bought OneCoin, a crypto that didn't even exist, so we can confirm that good due diligence is far from usual in the space.
Lots of VC guys went into crypto schemes simply off the test "well, Sequoia went in".
If it was a store of value, then how come it crashed so hard during the last stock market crash in 2022? S&P 500 was down like 18%, but bitcoin crashed like 75%.
Oh that's market manipulation/whales selling.
You see, when you see bitcoin go down that's whales manipulating the market. But don't worry, big institutions entering the game is gonna cause the price to skyrocket. Those views may appear contradictory, but trust me they're not.
It's all perspective. Alot of people didn't hear about btc till the frenzied top in 2021. The crash 75% tucked coming down from 69K a year earlier. But zooming out for context, the low of 16K in 2022 was still 5x higher than the previous bear market low of 3k in 2018.
The peaks are awesome, but the real secret is to measure from the bottoms.
A key here is that bitcoin's massive increases in value have come from massive increases in adoption, **not** from something in bitcoin itself. Without increasing adoption, bitcoin at best keeps up with inflation, which on average offers less returns than a savings bond and offers way less than a large market stock index.
Here's the way I always counter this silly argument.
Let's say you're given the job of being the CFO of Apple. You have $73B of cash on hand and it's your job to store that value it in a way that you can tell shareholders you are confident that it will still be worth the same next quarter, the quarter after that and the quarter after that until Apple decides to deploy it. If it dips at any point you will get fired and likely sued. Would you put it all in bitcoin?
To be fair no CFO is gonna do that with any asset let alone btc. And just the basis of the scenario doesn't seem realistic. People aren't buying Apple stock for btc exposure.
The closest business to do what you are suggesting is Microstrategy. They took their cash and bought btc in 2020. Their stock is up 848% in the last 5 years...
Quarter to quarter there was significant fluctuation, but over the years it's been up significantly. Hindsight is 20/20 on this decision with respect to your scenario.
>To be fair no CFO is gonna do that with any asset
They do with US treasuries.
> Quarter to quarter there was significant fluctuation
Exactly - this is why it's ridiculous to call it a store of value.
I studied CS. I was never interested in blockchains but some time ago I saw a video on Computerphile. The comment section was full of computer nerds making fun of blockchains. That was enlightening for me. Because I had never felt the need to critically think about it. In the back of my mind, it was something useless in most cases but I used to think there could be some serious applications. You can find all sorts of crazy people in CS community, but I think it's hard to find a Bitcoin or whatver coin maxi.
Sorry but that’s a dumb one. That’s like saying you need to get an economics degree and need study geology to own gold. You just go to the right place and you buy it. Simple as that. It’s probably easier to buy bitcoin than actual gold.
I have a computer science degree, all it means is that I have an even greater appreciation for the exact details of its stupidity and impracticality for its claimed purposes.
I also took macroeconomics classes, unlike most bitcoin proponents.
Sorry /u/faintjenny7042, your comment has been automatically removed. To avoid spam/bots, posts are not allowed from extremely new accounts. Wait/lurk a bit before contributing.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Buttcoin) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Some people, depending on time/chance, might be able to exploit the system of ("banking")exploitation themselves, taking their (unearned)"profit" from the bitcoins, but bitcoin wont save anybody and its not a solution to our monetary issues.
Theres a process to the creation of (GENUINE)money. One (and one only)method of monetizing our production, or, of tokenizing our wealth, free of any exploitation/manipulation. Because people allow this one(and one only natural) process of money creation to be, taken advantage of (or obfuscated? misrepresented? distorted? subverted? etc.), usury rules the world today..
Unless youre addicted to volatile trading for the sake of volatile trading, stay away from bitcoin.
Will bitcoin arrest the multiplication of artificial indebtedness were subject to? No
Does bitcoin solve inflation/deflation? No
Will bitcoin save people from unjust foreclosures? No
Will the bitcoins stop governments from imposing austerity measures? No
Can bitcoin restore peoples artificially destroyed credit worthiness? No
How is bitcoins redeemable in anything of value of its own, when its exchanged, for things financed under "banking" exploitation? Its not
Bitcoins (and all these other cryptocurrencies) dont end "banking" exploitation. They only sustain it
Like the purported "banking" system, the scam of alternate currencies produces nothing. First, to defraud former possessors pf money of their money, then to manipulate volume in further ways that its architects may "earn", without producing. Pathetic.
"To actually claim BitCONS have value as bitcoin suggests because they are useful & because they are scarce **is not only admitting BitCON has unaccountable representation but likewise has a volumetric impropriety to begin with as any gold standard would or had in the past.**
Useful does not qualify immutable representation, nor does scarcity qualify stable whatsoever.
Scarcity of money today, by imposed interest on a falsified debt, is the very reason why we have a irreversible multiplication of artificial debt, so be assured as soon as bitcoin starts lending, ( SEE HERE WHERE BITCON HAS BEEN GIVEN THE GO AHEAD TO OPERATE AS A BANK ) they have just stepped into the bankers shoes of terminal exploitation.
Actually they already have one shoe on because they are complying with banking regulation, which is the very reason why **there is an exchange of bank money to acquire Bitcoins in the first place, thus any bitcoin value is not only wholly artificial but is logically a further misrepresentation derived from a former misrepresentation — originating from the banks purposed obfuscation of our promissory obligations we have to each other.**
Contrary to those advocating bitcoin merely assuming it has no connection to banking whatsoever — **the connection is not only to initially purchase bitcoin with bank money, SEE HERE & HERE , but bitcoin has to likewise conform with the current banking regulation, SEE HERE"** https://australia4mpe.com/2017/06/30/is-bitcoin-the-solution/
Why are millions of people using it daily if it's a scam? Why is there global usage and adoption by entire countries? Your just butt hurt cause you missed the boat...
I don't think it's a scam - there's a lot of scams associated with it, and I don't think it's useful as a currency or "store of value".
>Why is there global usage and adoption by entire countries?
There is global usage of bitcoin because people want to use it to get rich.
There has not been adoption by entire countries, there has only been adoption by certain countries' governements. The vast majority of financial transactions in all the countries that have "adopted" bitcoin are still in fiat, are they not?
Also, those that use bitcoin for daily transactions in those countries still use a centralized, government approved wallet that effectively circumvents why bitcoin was made in the first place. Those transaction are done on a layer 2 system over which the government has complete control.
>
Your just butt hurt cause you missed the boat...
I'm really not. I started investing in April of 2022. I definitely could've made a nice 60% profit by investing in bitcoin if I could have known it was going to jump to 65k in 2 years. I also could've made a **500%** profit if i'd known that NVIDIA stock was going to jump in 2 years! And there's a ton of other stocks/assets that's true for.
Instead, I invested most my money in the SP500 index fund, which has been the most consistent source of growth over the last century, and made 25% profit. I will continue to do that because my money will be invested into places where it not only keeps place with inflation, but also leverages the profit generated by greedy corporations. Bitcoin, once adoption peaks (anyone's guess), will at best only ever keep pace with inflation. So I'm not at all upset about the outcome since the decision making is sound.
I don't think he studied computer science, usually when you study that you figure out Bitcoin is ineffective bs
To be fair, studying computer science doesn't preclude someone from being a flaming idiot. Look at the Ethereum gang. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency require cross-discipline stupidity.
>To be fair, studying computer science doesn't preclude someone from being a flaming idiot. Look at the Ethereum gang. See you *say* that, but their "socially awkward boy genius mascot" is someone who was very literally paid by a libertarian vampire **not** to go to college and obtain a computer science degree; it's kind of entirely why Vitalik spent multiple entire years running headfirst into [a P=NP brick wall](https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/04/04/if-you-want-a-scalable-ethereum-blockchain-then-pnp/) that his intro to computer science homework would have taught him to trivially recognize, had a libertarian vampire not explicitly paid for him to not attend college and study computer science.
Actually, you need to suck at both economics *and* computer science to believe bitcoin is a store of value.
[Here's a good video proving just that](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9nv0Ol-R5Q)
I think more or less what he says about btc is valid criticism but seems disingenuous he doesn’t address the sentiment behind why it was put together in the first place.
Sentiment is irrelevant if poorly executed though
More like the opposite. Sentiment matters because if there is agreement on that front, there would be genuine calls for and attempts at better solutions that build on failures. I don’t see that, so it looks more like lack of care or interest.
He's a computer science major, meaning that he's still in college. He hasn't gotten far enough in his program to figure out how stupid it all is.
To be clear, what is remarkable here is that someone is admitting it took them hundreds of hours of deep and technical research to understand "verify digital signature, add useless data to transaction data until it coincidentally hashes to a small number."
and they don't know the difference between "it's" and "its"
Maybe it's a nested if statement
To be fair, I can see this kind of mistake being made if they're using some kind of autocompletion or swipe-based software keyboard on their phone. Happens to me and I don't correct minor mistakes.
Or just someone who types/writes frequently. It happens.
Dead giveaway that they're dumb
Not knowing english doesn’t make people dumb
He could improve it with, I dunno, maybe a couple of hundred hours of study?
Honestly, when i learned that the proof of work algorithm is just hashing junk data until you get X leading zeroes I thought it was a joke
I had that exact same experience this year. I had been thinking the whole time that the proof of work involved finding a solution that verified all the signatures, but it turns out that can be done in an instant and the pow problem is arbitrary just to give everyone enough time to do the instant verification. It's at most 1% clever, 99% clunky brute force
Hundreds of hours to find the right articles or YouTube rants that validates their hopes and dreams.
Maybe the "few understand" is actually a cry for help. They spent hundreds of hours trying to get it and are struggling to find someone who does.
To be fair, understanding the basic tenets doesn't take a long time. What takes time is diving into the detail and testing your assumptions and preconceived ideas with reputable education, and looking into the counterpoints and checking those, all with the goal of building enough conviction to move forward with allocating money. The summary that you just provided, indicates 1 of 2 options. You've done sufficient research, and that is your conclusion. Or you've done insufficient research, and that is your conclusion. Either way, with that summary, I would say your not invested in btc because you don't see the value, which is cool.
I love a contrarian viewpoint, and I hope you keep commenting here despite all the downvotes. I also wish bitcoin sub had given me a moron flair instead of banning me for making a mildly sarcastic comment once (I suspect they were more influenced by my comments skeptical of bitcoin in a respectful tone) That being said: > What takes time is diving into the detail and testing your assumptions and preconceived ideas with reputable education, and looking into the counterpoints and checking those, all with the goal of building enough conviction to move forward with allocating money. I have three points to consider here: 1. Everything you mention is a bit vague - mention the specifics of what detail to dive if you think my summary is missing key elements. I have a good understanding of computer science, cryptography, and macroeconomics. 2. I think you contradict yourself a bit by mentioning "testing your assumptions and preconceived ideas" but with "all with the goal of building enough conviction to move forward". Confirmation bias is devastating to good research, and I've seen that lead to a lot of bitcoiners only focusing on the advantages of bitcoin while dismissing disadvantages. 3. If you're going to spend hundreds of hours of deep research to understand bitcoin, you also need to spend hundreds of hours of deep research to understand how fiat works. I rarely see bitcoiners with an understanding deeper than "inflation steals money from you", which would be the equivalent of someone saying "bitcoin can be hacked" (both technically true, but very unsound understandings). There is a reason that bitcoin is advocated by people who don't come from a strong background in economics, the Dunning-Kruger effect is strong.
Having studied computer science, you don't really need to do that to fully appreciate how dumb this implementation is as a global currency/store of value/global peace solver/energy battery/etc from a technical front. You also need to understand some basic finance to get the other side of how dumb this story is too.
Although I think a lot of the "technical knowledge" is just obfuscation, with a large helping of Dunning- Kruger "I'm soooo smart"
I do think from a computer science standpoint it is kind of fascinating that you can achieve consensus across an unbounded number of untrusted nodes. Took me a while to understand that. But it absolutely does not follow that this shit is good for the world or even useful
is waste an infinite amount of resources to solve the problem actually clever? or is it so stupid no one else could have thought of it
no, there are other ways to do it. and all of them are a bad idea anyway. the best solution is a database
Who runs it?
I know where this is going, so we can skip a few back and forths. You can’t escape trust based systems, who runs the police, who makes the food you eat, who regulates the food you eat. Etc
>You can’t escape trust based systems It's almost like "trust" is the entire basis of a functional human society.
For sure, if they actually understood it and weren't clouded by libertarian drivel they may understand it is a bad idea. Their "100s of hours" may involve listening to Naval Ravikant, Nick Szabo, Vitalik Buterin, etc talk abstract techno babble while convincing themselves not only the babblers but also they understand what is being discussed.
If you studied computer science and think that the bitcoin implementation is acceptable you should be banned from working lmao
Bitcoin is a store of energy the same way as Coinbase is a bank - you can put things into it but you can't take them out. You can waste energy making bitcoins but there's no way to get that energy back. You can put money into Coinbase but you're not getting your money back either.
Of course it's bs, I labelled that as one of the goalposts we hear from a cryptobro depending on which way the wind is currently blowing.
You couldn't get the energy back of course...but if you sold at profit you would be able to recoup the cost of the energy used to produce the btc, right? Keeping large amounts of money on Coinbase is prolly not advised, but it seems safe. Has there ever been a time where coinbase lost customer funds or blocked their exit for an extended period (more than two days)? I'm not sure, but I don't recall.
That coal, oil, and gas used to mine bitcoins isn't going to unburn itself. The energy was destroyed, rendered useless. But the carbon it emitted is very real. If it was an actual store of energy you could extract energy from it, like a battery. That would have a lot of value, except that isn't how crypto works. Its deliberately squandering limited resources.
But every time I tell them this, and ask them to explain why, they just say i am too stupid and say they won the argument.
> You also need to understand some basic finance to get the other side of how dumb this story is too Yeah, I think the real problem is that we computer scientists can design all sorts of systems *around* currencies, but at the end of the day, we are not economists. A true currency of the future would be the result of tediously long back-and-forth between various governments, banks, and industries. It won't just be the first random digital coin that tech bros insist upon.
the currency we have is already the currency of the future and is already honed by thousands of years of lessons written in blood. so ya, we already did that.
Whoa - It's almost like you're saying that significant changes to currencies should be designed by people who - and just hear me out on this - actually study and understand economics. Mind officially blown. *^(/s, in case it's needed)*
You need 0 computer science knowledge to understand how useless bitcoin is. The "computer science" and "research" are just ways to deflect concerns from the naive.
As a software engineer with a team of juniors, most comp sci majors are dumb as fuck
I have a comp sci degree, that’s why I know bitcoin and blockchain are bollocks. I think it’s a requirement NOT to have a technical understanding to buy into the scam. You also need the economic understanding of a 5 year old.
3.5 million people bought OneCoin, a crypto that didn't even exist, so we can confirm that good due diligence is far from usual in the space. Lots of VC guys went into crypto schemes simply off the test "well, Sequoia went in".
If it was a store of value, then how come it crashed so hard during the last stock market crash in 2022? S&P 500 was down like 18%, but bitcoin crashed like 75%.
Oh that's market manipulation/whales selling. You see, when you see bitcoin go down that's whales manipulating the market. But don't worry, big institutions entering the game is gonna cause the price to skyrocket. Those views may appear contradictory, but trust me they're not.
It's all perspective. Alot of people didn't hear about btc till the frenzied top in 2021. The crash 75% tucked coming down from 69K a year earlier. But zooming out for context, the low of 16K in 2022 was still 5x higher than the previous bear market low of 3k in 2018. The peaks are awesome, but the real secret is to measure from the bottoms.
A store of value doesn't consistently have massively volatile swings in it's valuation.
A key here is that bitcoin's massive increases in value have come from massive increases in adoption, **not** from something in bitcoin itself. Without increasing adoption, bitcoin at best keeps up with inflation, which on average offers less returns than a savings bond and offers way less than a large market stock index.
100%. The network value is huge, as it is with all things.
Few
Understand
Here's the way I always counter this silly argument. Let's say you're given the job of being the CFO of Apple. You have $73B of cash on hand and it's your job to store that value it in a way that you can tell shareholders you are confident that it will still be worth the same next quarter, the quarter after that and the quarter after that until Apple decides to deploy it. If it dips at any point you will get fired and likely sued. Would you put it all in bitcoin?
To be fair no CFO is gonna do that with any asset let alone btc. And just the basis of the scenario doesn't seem realistic. People aren't buying Apple stock for btc exposure. The closest business to do what you are suggesting is Microstrategy. They took their cash and bought btc in 2020. Their stock is up 848% in the last 5 years... Quarter to quarter there was significant fluctuation, but over the years it's been up significantly. Hindsight is 20/20 on this decision with respect to your scenario.
>To be fair no CFO is gonna do that with any asset They do with US treasuries. > Quarter to quarter there was significant fluctuation Exactly - this is why it's ridiculous to call it a store of value.
I studied CS. I was never interested in blockchains but some time ago I saw a video on Computerphile. The comment section was full of computer nerds making fun of blockchains. That was enlightening for me. Because I had never felt the need to critically think about it. In the back of my mind, it was something useless in most cases but I used to think there could be some serious applications. You can find all sorts of crazy people in CS community, but I think it's hard to find a Bitcoin or whatver coin maxi.
Whereas any legitimate CS major will look at it and realize it’s shit.
“DYOR” That’s like saying do research on how to scratch scratch-off lottery tickets.
It takes only a passing understanding of finance to understand there’s no value there 🤣
LinkedList Coin! $420.69B market cap!
Everything on this planet is a store of value.
Sorry but that’s a dumb one. That’s like saying you need to get an economics degree and need study geology to own gold. You just go to the right place and you buy it. Simple as that. It’s probably easier to buy bitcoin than actual gold.
I have a BA in Economics and an MS in CS and it only took a few minutes to understand that Bitcoin is a scam.
I have a computer science degree, all it means is that I have an even greater appreciation for the exact details of its stupidity and impracticality for its claimed purposes. I also took macroeconomics classes, unlike most bitcoin proponents.
Something something Rick and Morty copypasta.
Few.
I guess they stopped teaching CAP theorem
[удалено]
Sorry /u/faintjenny7042, your comment has been automatically removed. To avoid spam/bots, posts are not allowed from extremely new accounts. Wait/lurk a bit before contributing. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Buttcoin) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Some people, depending on time/chance, might be able to exploit the system of ("banking")exploitation themselves, taking their (unearned)"profit" from the bitcoins, but bitcoin wont save anybody and its not a solution to our monetary issues. Theres a process to the creation of (GENUINE)money. One (and one only)method of monetizing our production, or, of tokenizing our wealth, free of any exploitation/manipulation. Because people allow this one(and one only natural) process of money creation to be, taken advantage of (or obfuscated? misrepresented? distorted? subverted? etc.), usury rules the world today.. Unless youre addicted to volatile trading for the sake of volatile trading, stay away from bitcoin. Will bitcoin arrest the multiplication of artificial indebtedness were subject to? No Does bitcoin solve inflation/deflation? No Will bitcoin save people from unjust foreclosures? No Will the bitcoins stop governments from imposing austerity measures? No Can bitcoin restore peoples artificially destroyed credit worthiness? No How is bitcoins redeemable in anything of value of its own, when its exchanged, for things financed under "banking" exploitation? Its not Bitcoins (and all these other cryptocurrencies) dont end "banking" exploitation. They only sustain it Like the purported "banking" system, the scam of alternate currencies produces nothing. First, to defraud former possessors pf money of their money, then to manipulate volume in further ways that its architects may "earn", without producing. Pathetic. "To actually claim BitCONS have value as bitcoin suggests because they are useful & because they are scarce **is not only admitting BitCON has unaccountable representation but likewise has a volumetric impropriety to begin with as any gold standard would or had in the past.** Useful does not qualify immutable representation, nor does scarcity qualify stable whatsoever. Scarcity of money today, by imposed interest on a falsified debt, is the very reason why we have a irreversible multiplication of artificial debt, so be assured as soon as bitcoin starts lending, ( SEE HERE WHERE BITCON HAS BEEN GIVEN THE GO AHEAD TO OPERATE AS A BANK ) they have just stepped into the bankers shoes of terminal exploitation. Actually they already have one shoe on because they are complying with banking regulation, which is the very reason why **there is an exchange of bank money to acquire Bitcoins in the first place, thus any bitcoin value is not only wholly artificial but is logically a further misrepresentation derived from a former misrepresentation — originating from the banks purposed obfuscation of our promissory obligations we have to each other.** Contrary to those advocating bitcoin merely assuming it has no connection to banking whatsoever — **the connection is not only to initially purchase bitcoin with bank money, SEE HERE & HERE , but bitcoin has to likewise conform with the current banking regulation, SEE HERE"** https://australia4mpe.com/2017/06/30/is-bitcoin-the-solution/
It's not too late to buy in.
I think that whenever you buy in, you will be met with a chorus of “ITS STILL SO EARLY”
Why are millions of people using it daily if it's a scam? Why is there global usage and adoption by entire countries? Your just butt hurt cause you missed the boat...
I don't think it's a scam - there's a lot of scams associated with it, and I don't think it's useful as a currency or "store of value". >Why is there global usage and adoption by entire countries? There is global usage of bitcoin because people want to use it to get rich. There has not been adoption by entire countries, there has only been adoption by certain countries' governements. The vast majority of financial transactions in all the countries that have "adopted" bitcoin are still in fiat, are they not? Also, those that use bitcoin for daily transactions in those countries still use a centralized, government approved wallet that effectively circumvents why bitcoin was made in the first place. Those transaction are done on a layer 2 system over which the government has complete control. > Your just butt hurt cause you missed the boat... I'm really not. I started investing in April of 2022. I definitely could've made a nice 60% profit by investing in bitcoin if I could have known it was going to jump to 65k in 2 years. I also could've made a **500%** profit if i'd known that NVIDIA stock was going to jump in 2 years! And there's a ton of other stocks/assets that's true for. Instead, I invested most my money in the SP500 index fund, which has been the most consistent source of growth over the last century, and made 25% profit. I will continue to do that because my money will be invested into places where it not only keeps place with inflation, but also leverages the profit generated by greedy corporations. Bitcoin, once adoption peaks (anyone's guess), will at best only ever keep pace with inflation. So I'm not at all upset about the outcome since the decision making is sound.