Simple would be download the strike app, go through the kyc, link a bank acct and smash buy, right on your phone.
Simple would be download the strike app, go through the kyc, link a bank acct and smash buy, right on your phone.
@scorpion
Money is no more of a social fiction than is the internet, language or mathematics...it is an abstraction of reality that allows people to coordinate in more elaborate ways than any other organism, by following a specific ruleset.
When people don't know the rules or choose not to follow them, nothing good happens. Try communicating with someone speaking ebonics, or solving a calculus problem without understanding derivatives. Or landing on Mars mistaking imperial with metric.
People only benefit if others use the same ruleset, or the result is just useless noise or chaos. A select few that can change the rules of money, in order to benefit themselves, is why we have clown world. It is the very root of the problem. Weimar Germany experienced a clown world very close to what we have today.
The more people that reject government money, the less power they will have. It is the only peaceful way to shrink the metastasizing cancer that is the federal government.
Money is no more of a social fiction than is the internet, language or mathematics...it is an abstraction of reality that allows people to coordinate in more elaborate ways than any other organism, by following a specific ruleset.
When people don't know the rules or choose not to follow them, nothing good happens. Try communicating with someone speaking ebonics, or solving a calculus problem without understanding derivatives. Or landing on Mars mistaking imperial with metric.
People only benefit if others use the same ruleset, or the result is just useless noise or chaos. A select few that can change the rules of money, in order to benefit themselves, is why we have clown world. It is the very root of the problem. Weimar Germany experienced a clown world very close to what we have today.
The more people that reject government money, the less power they will have. It is the only peaceful way to shrink the metastasizing cancer that is the federal government.
Last edited:
Do you honestly not realize that Bitcoin has flaws? Seriously? Are you that drunk on the Kool-Aid? Here's a list off the top of my head:
1) Bitcoin has no intrinsic value. Unlike stocks, bonds or real estate, it produces no rents, dividends or interest. it has no unique physical properties or vast historical monetary lineage like gold. It is issued by no government who is willing to back it by force of arms and law. It exists only on computer hard drives and in the minds of those who trade it. It is nothing more than a financial fad.
2) Every dollar that you or anyone else has ever made from Bitcoin has been taken from another Bitcoin trader. As an asset, it is entirely zero sum - this is why Bitcoin proponents are so evangelistic and defensive about it. They know that the only way they can come out ahead is by constantly encouraging a new rotation of suckers to come in, thereby pumping the market and ultimately becoming bagholders when the market inevitably tanks once again.
3) The Bitcoin network itself is primitive and shockingly slow, relying on cobbled on layer 2 solutions for basic functionality, which themselves are highly dysfunctional. Bitcoin's reliance on the network itself is a flawed concept, especially once it reaches maturity and mining rewards plummet. Miners will have less and less incentive to maintain the network and validate transactions. When mining ultimately ceases, it's anyone's guess what happens to the network (almost certainly nothing good).
4) Bitcoin mining consumes massive amounts of electricity, in world with soaring electricity demand thanks to EVs and AI. Bitcoin mining will inevitably come under increasing regulatory scrutiny in the coming years for this reason.
5) Bitcoin operates as a public ledger with zero privacy, which means that all of your transactions are easily traceable and wide open to anyone to knows your address.
No one really values money itself, they value the things that money can buy.
Decentralization can be a strength or a weakness. It's not necessarily a great idea in matters of finance. Go read about the history of wildcat banking in the mid-19th century U.S. and learn something (or maybe you already know about this, since you are apparently so well-read and educated on all financial matters).
How much have you made with Bitcoin? Post your bag and impress us.
I just finished a book about the Weimar period, actually (The Coming of the Third Reich by Richard Evans). Weimar was definitely screwed up on many levels, but the inflation and economic collapse they experienced was largely transitory and actually the least of their problems. The social and political environment was arguably far worse, with levels of violence and decadence that far eclipse anything we see today (literally imagine street brawls between hundreds of uniformed Nazis and communists happening on a near-daily basis, and open child prostitution). What was interesting to read was that most of the wealthy - those who owned land and shares of corporations, and who borrowed money early on - actually came out of the inflationary period largely intact. This is because real assets maintain value over time. It was only people who held actual currency or loans (the poor, savers and lenders) who got screwed.
I disagree, simply because the definition of money itself has varied through time. Some cultures have used shells or beads for money, for example. There is also the example of the tally stick. Ancient cultures had precious metal coins, company towns used to pay their workers in paper scrip that could only be used at company stores, etc...
In contrast, the internet is built of physical telecommunications infrastructure, language is the verbal and written expression of human thought (which we must first recognize as a real thing if we are to even begin entertaining our existence itself. See: Descartes), and mathematics is simply man's effort at decoding the inner workings of God's universal laws. These are all real things that have a firm existence. Money, in contrast, is simply whatever people are willing to exchange with one another for labor or goods. It is literally just the shared belief of a population that their efforts and goods can be exchanged freely with one another without the need for barter. But money itself is always worthless (by necessity, ironically, or people would hoard it for its own sake rather than exchange it for goods. See: Bitcoin). Ultimately, it is only the belief in money that gives it power and usefulness.
I've been through 1-5 and so has chance. So unless you have different or specific questions, I'll refer you or others to the posts we've made detailing how you ignore everything we say in those that explains all of your criticisms, which aren't real. You're even going to the energy thing now, which is just sad. As an example of how funny that is, more recently it has been reported that the BTC network doesn't even require the electricity that the world uses for clothes dryers, which technically aren't even necessary in life. The US alone uses ~75% of the BTC network yearly energy for drying. I'm not going to be nice, that argument is flat out retarded and thoughtless.
You never talk about digital scarcity or the double spend problem. Those are huge discoveries for the digital age. It's telling you ignore them. Trustless, permissionless transmission of value has absolutely no intrinsic value. Sure dude. Your argument is that value doesn't have value. Just stop, it's embarrassing. The only thing I will enjoy more than how sad it is that you refuse to do the homework to understand this is you eating humble pie within a year or two.
There's a minute chance I eat the pie, and that's why I put my money where my mouth is, since the gains are so outsized and the trend, coming buyers and investors, and network expansion so clear. It's usually people with skin in the game that come up big. That's me again.
You never talk about digital scarcity or the double spend problem. Those are huge discoveries for the digital age. It's telling you ignore them. Trustless, permissionless transmission of value has absolutely no intrinsic value. Sure dude. Your argument is that value doesn't have value. Just stop, it's embarrassing. The only thing I will enjoy more than how sad it is that you refuse to do the homework to understand this is you eating humble pie within a year or two.
There's a minute chance I eat the pie, and that's why I put my money where my mouth is, since the gains are so outsized and the trend, coming buyers and investors, and network expansion so clear. It's usually people with skin in the game that come up big. That's me again.
Exactly. These guys keep telling some of us that we're too dumb and too old to understand bitcoin and that we're just jealous because they have more money than we do... "If you'd just spend 50 hours reading about bitcoin you wouldn't be so ignorant on the subject!"... Yeah, and if you'd read 10,000 hours of biblical philosophy you'd understand that money is the root of all evil.
Get. Out. Now.
Last edited:
We've now reached the point in your delusions where I apparently am not even real! You aren't even reading this post right now. Shit is really getting trippy in here.
You clearly aren't married, and never will be with this attitude, I'm afraid.
That's because "digital scarcity" is a moronic, nonsensical concept (see: NFTs), and the double spend problem is a solution in search of a problem. These are simply marketing buzzwords designed to draw in suckers who have a wildly exaggerated view of their own intelligence and discernment (clearly, working like a charm in your case).
There is definitely some amount of value in this concept. But how much? And why do you ridiculously assume that only Bitcoin can fulfill such a role, especially at such a grossly inflated price point as you predict (i.e. $500k - 1m+)? Is BTC primarily about permissionless transmission of value? Or is it a store of value? Do you not understand that these are two very different functions? (i.e. consider the difference between wire transfers and physical gold).
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. - Prov. 16:18
I got a kick out of this one.
Ok, sure.
I'm aware of the balances required in life.
I guess we'll see in the time frame I suggested. There's not much more to be said until you do more homework, ask more questions, and find more answers. I'm hoping that the pride part isn't on your side when the realities are even more undeniable, though.
JayR
Heritage
I think it's one of the most important inventions in the history of man. More important than the internet. Up there with the printing press. I'm a buyer.
Edit: Ok, maybe "up there with the wheel" was a bit hyperbolic. But I stand by printing press.
Last edited:
JayR
Heritage
This literally never enters my mind when I periodically trade my US dollars for BTC.
Do I want the value of my BTC to go up? Of course. But more than that, I want to hold a non-confiscateable, fungible, portable, store of value asset that is immune to "money printer goes BRRRR" inflation. Bitcoin.
I love how you're so addicted to gambling that you'll even hedge your bets against criticism and being wrong:
No one's denying that you're a smart, rich, successful genius who is unmarried to an 18-year-old virgin in rural Yugoslavia. However, money can't buy you love.
But then there's this gobblygook...
Dude, get a hobby. Build log cabins, invest in 8-cylinder CAT diesel generators and backhoes, heck, learn to drive and restore old John Deere tractors, anything but this nerdy-tech number crunching JQ bullshit. Invest in real world objects and tools that can actually do something to help yourself and others in a time of crisis, not this pie in the sky Lucifarian strike it rich dream. If the electricity goes out for 8 days your BTC is f*ucked, but your CAT generator will be purring like a cat.
No one's denying that you're a smart, rich, successful genius who is unmarried to an 18-year-old virgin in rural Yugoslavia. However, money can't buy you love.
JayR
Heritage
Why not do both?
I have a Honda EU2200, and it saved my butt last time a hurricane knocked out my power for.... 8 days (good guess!). Bitcoin didn't miss a block during those 8 days, just like it hasn't since it's inception 15 years ago.
Thanks for this
This kind of stuff gets silly after a while. If I don't say even "minute" all I do is get hit with "pride, arrogance, god complex" stuff. When I do, you call it a hedge. It's dishonest and frankly, dumb.
I have a generator and unlike many of the people who haven't done homework, the doomsday stuff (while possible) shows that again people's risk assessment is poor. The odds are that I will win big and have a much better life when everything is tallied. You can call it gambling all you want, but risk is the only thing that improves lives. Not being envious of others for seeing things and taking advantage of them, because perhaps you don't have the mind, security, or skills they do. Fear often stifles people, and it stifles MOST people. Look around.
No, it can't. Luckily for me, I'm not approaching that angle. What's more, if we're honest, the love of a woman now more than ever is conditional, so big picture it's almost irrelevant.
Precisely - as stated above.
This is demonstrably false.
Suppose you are selling a lawnmower for $200. A buyer contacts you and agrees to pay $200 for the lawnmower. You would only agree to the exchange if you perceive the money as being more valuable than the lawnmower. The buyer would not agree to the exchange if he did not perceive the lawnmower as having more value to him than the money.
If money was worthless, no one would accept it in exchange for goods or services. (See: Zimbabwe)
The necessity of a money that loses value over time is a Keynesian argument that is used to brainwash the population into accepting time-theft via Fiat money printing, not an actual mechanism of economics.
understanding what money is, technologically, and understanding human action (praxeology) are prerequisites for understanding Bitcoin.
no one is hoarding Bitcoin. People will trade Bitcoin for fiat slave tokens, or goods/services if they value their Bitcoin less than having those other things. Many people, however, value their Bitcoin more than the current market price, or owning other things. Money that holds its value will not cause people to starve to death as they greedily clutch their Bitcoins, or live naked under a tarp. They will still buy things, but they will be useful things, instead of plastic Chinese clown world garbage.
Last edited:
I think you're misunderstanding my point, which is that money is worthless except for the things it can buy. For example, if you were stranded on a deserted island by yourself with no hope of rescue, money is only as useful as the paper it's printed on. In such a scenario, you would willingly trade millions of dollars for some simple tools and camping equipment. In this regard, we can see how money itself is nothing but a useful social and economic fiction. It has value only insofar as a broad base of the public believes that they can exchange it for goods and services, but has no real value in and of itself. This is why the concept of digital scarcity as assigning some inherent value to Bitcoin is totally preposterous.
Anything in abundance that isn‘t scarce, has no “intrinsic value”. Air you breathe on the desert island doesn’t have much value to you…but it has a lot of value to the guy scuba diving a shipwreck. A man drowning in a lake has no need for water, but someone lost in the desert would trade almost anything for water.
Things don’t give themselves value, nor do they just have it for no reason. Individuals assign value to things, depending on individual preferences. Whale Oil used to be tremendously valuable, and crude oil once had no value. The commodities didn’t decide to lose or gain value, people collectively valued them differently over time. Some magical self-contained “intrinsic value“ doesn‘t exist. The only value things have is the value you place on it.
This whole concept of intrinsic value probably arose from a fundamental misunderstanding of the value of gold, and how it came to have value. Before the 19th century and the brilliant minds of the Austrian School, gold’s persistent value throughout history was thought to be this “intrinsic value” concept. The study of proto-money led to a better understanding of how gold became valued, and how everything gets its value.
Last edited:
Then how does Bitcoin's "digital scarcity" confer any objective value on it whatsoever? Or do you concede that it only has value, as you said, to the extent that some individuals choose to assign value to it? Which is the point I was making about money itself having no value except as a shared social fiction. People don't believe that money itself is inherently valuable, they just believe that they can freely exchange it for the things they want to buy. As I said, this is the only way that a currency can actually function as a medium of exchange - if people believe that money has value in and of itself they will hoard it instead of spending it (see: Gresham's law), which decreases the velocity of money, reduces the number of transactions and creates significant drag on the economy.
exactly, yes
Nothing has value inherently. Whale oil didn’t have inherent value, nor does crude oil, or gold. None of these things have objective value, including money. Things only have subjective value. Money is a good, just like oil, water, or bullets. The only difference between money, and other goods, is that money has by definition the broadest market appeal of any other good. Gasoline has broad market appeal, and so does bread, but it has less than money. All of these things have subjective value, and none of them have objective value.
Right out of the (Keynesian) economics textbook. Gresham‘s law isn’t what it appears…it is people getting rid of bad money as fast as possible because it is so bad. Bad money doesn’t replace good money, it is people getting rid of a hot potato. People buying things that they don’t need, because it is better than holding slave money, is terrible for the economy. Do you think people buying 4 rental houses and creating a housing market too expensive for young families is economically (or socially) desirable or efficient? The true market signal is corrupted because the money is dysfunctional.
Zimbabwe dollars did not drive out US dollars, it happened the other way around.
(see Thier’s Law)
Most people don’t hoard their own feces, either. They flush them as fast as possible. The velocity of crap is extremely high. The fact that people are getting rid of fiat dogsh@#*t as fast as possible isn‘t the sign of a healthy economy.
Last edited:
Bingo.
I don't see how our friend doesn't see the point at this juncture.
You don't understand what you think you understand. Again, recency and normalcy bias have jumbled your point of view (confirming that you are old and can't think of disruption innovation): a nation or economic system cannot possibly depart from being an inflationary/debt one, can it? Amazin'
The beautiful thing that you don't see, and the only thing that remains is time, is that they don't have a choice. Shocking, I know. That's what happens when you actually understand what's going on here.
ps - they could nuke the whole world and render it all meaningless, but even that still proves our point
pwned
scorpion keeps thinking that everyone agrees on value and that they have for all time, in some bizarre and ignorant way (I'm saying you are ignoring history which is why you can't and won't address chance's points). Do the Amish need gasoline? Nope. It has zero value to them. You could say - and I'll make this short but I could do refer to thousands examples of these - but it does have value (what you call intrinsic) because it could make their lives "better"! Exactly our point. Meditate on this, because that's precisely the point with BTC and your inability to understand what money, the best money, is.
A better example would be someone driving an EV. Gasoline has zero value to that individual. Gasoline still has a price, which is set at the margins, but it has no value. Value is always individual, while price is a universal collective of information, not value.