How does BTC/ETH/Crypto work? Is it a scam/doomed to fail?
Discuss the legitimacy here.
Originally Posted by MSchu18
As should Small sovereign nations that find themselves under the control of The International Monetary Fund... where Countries are offered the enslavement of free flowing liquidity in exchange for allegiance and obedience.
A Bitcoin backed Currency/standard is not advantageous for the apex economies that are used to controlling and economically enslaving others different than themselves... it's a REAL threat to those in control.
And its a reality now. And it wasn't before.
A currency backed by bitcoin would be even worst then gold .
It’s human nature at one point countries indebted themselves too much ….
Having debt tied to the value of bitcoin going eternally higher would be disastrous.
You can blame imf and others all u want but it’s the countries by themselves that fack it up in the first place and coming to beg the imf to « help » them afterwards ….
Bitcoin can’t by itself prevent human nature for doing stupid stuff .
They always do eventually.
For some of your point you aren't think of a bitcoin standard that has central banks elastically supplying their respective currencies.
For other parts of your point, its not how economics works.
what is the reason you continue to quote Nash?
It doesn't make one smart to quote smart people, and it's not really germane to the conversation.
If I post a quote of him talking about a standard that is like a gold standard but not a gold standard, how do you assert that its not germane to the subject of a comparable bitcoin standard?
I don't understand this insanity?
You guys are treating me like I'm saying "oh you won't nash"
Jesus jbouton stop it with 'nash' every word.
Nothing can be more juvenile than asserting bitcoin is going to hyperinflate fiat. nothing can be more relevant significant and critical to our lives than getting people to understand that we can use bitcoin as the basis of a new monetary order that is described in nash's work. The THING DESCRIBED. I want to point to that.
Ok so if we want to talk about how bitcoin should be discussed in the context of how there can exist a money between the competing super powers china and the US, and how interesting it is that neither have to sanction it to be able to reliably settle in it and how stupid it is to only paint bitcoin as a freedom for the individual money then thats off topic?
toothsayer would NOT let anyone talk about bitcoin in the context of a high value settlement medium among nations. he would constantly bring the dialogue because to whether or not it is a good coffee money for joe blow which it isn't and can't be.
everywhere on the internet is infiltrated and forcing the conversation between bitcoin is nothing to bitcoin will destroy fiat. let this place force it to be between hyperbitcoinizatoin and nashification (a gold like bitcoin standard NOT the saifedean kind) and watch it light the world on fire.
toothsayer would NOT let anyone talk about bitcoin in the context of a high value settlement medium among nations.
you wouldn't use a Commodity for international settlement... you would use something like XRP and settlement would be nearly instantaneous, unlike the current 'text' based system of Swift.
you wouldn't use a Commodity for international settlement... you would use something like XRP and settlement would be nearly instantaneous, unlike the current 'text' based system of Swift.
you have no concept of what you are talking.
Ok you wouldn't use an international commodity for settlement. IN WHAT ****ING UNIVERSE?
XRP? YOU HAVE NO CONCEPT OF TECHNICAL DETAILS. ZERO CLUE.
And in what ****ING universe is talking about bitcoin off topic in a ****ing bitcoin general thread.
You guys are so gross.
You guys need to become better people. You treat humans terribly.
Money is something that arose naturally. It has a curious nature to it such that we all use it but don't realize that we don't' really understand its nature.
Its even deeper than that. At the most fundamental layer of "reciprocal altruism" as Szabo calls it when he draws reference to dawkins, it allows us to make trustworthy arrangements and contracts that otherwise couldn't be formed.
It brings groups that otherwise have different and competing paradigms into cooperative mutually beneficial order. But of course then thats above our ability to really comprehend if we are from one side of the dualistic parties. (are you able to comprehend a world where the us and china agree to the same monetary standard?)
If bitcoin is going to bring all of the nations under a single order, you have to understand how much its nature is such that we dont' really understand the paradigm shift. When people want to hold the dialogue to the petty question of 'is bitcoin a good medium for a daily used coffee type money'. Its because they have ulterior motives other than truth.
The second Blackrock and the ETFs became THE thing for BTC, imho the dream died. The whole decentralized ideal money think went up in smoke right there.
The second Blackrock and the ETFs became THE thing for BTC, imho the dream died. The whole decentralized ideal money think went up in smoke right there.
If you are an idiot then your dream died. If you know nothing about economics, your dream died. If you have a false silly narrative your dream died.
If you have any brains at all, you understand bitcoin's price needs these things around the world in order to have a type of strength. Yes 'ideal money' died there. But not "Ideal Money"...
Ideal Money only starts when the price hits that equilibrium of stability...then this starts...
Then what happens when it has that new type of price equilibrium?
You see the world is beginning to ask because of satoshi 'what is the ideal money?'. Nash was beyond clever here, he answered it with completely different context and frameworks, knowing we would be approaching the question naturally eventually...
Its not what is the ideal money...its 'what is the ideal money scenario'....?
When we would rather watch humanity slaughter itself than admit we are wrong.
popcorn.gif
Early front runner for my favorite video of the year.
Pete rizzo and his peers seem to have taken out short positions against silicon valley VC's, betting that ethereum and crypto infrastructure will soon get absorbed by bitcoin. So these guys now have a vested interest in controlling the protocol evolution/development. You can see it in his face.
I stated that the asymptotic cost per hash is stabilized by the DAA
And I got kicked out of the thread.
I'm pushing back. This thread is controlled by an absolutely OUT OF CONTROL mod.
Who is inserting their own political beliefs and holding the community to them.
Show me the cost per hash is determinant on the mining efficacy.
its a god dman math question that you disprove with empirical evidence not just ****ing mod and delete me making the point.
use your ****ing heads.
*******s.
Is it not true that cost of a hash is averaged/stabilized over time by the daa?
Its a miracle if it is and don't let bgp kick me out until you answer.
Or what do I mean to say that isn't about the supply.
Recommend Laura Shin's interview with Kyle Davies for entertainment value, dunno how to embed videos here but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEsjWV7G...
Recommend Laura Shin's interview with Kyle Davies for entertainment value, dunno how to embed videos here but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEsjWV7G...
All you do is copy/paste the "IEsjWV7GRgY" part, highlight it, and click the YouTube icon. It's the same thing for a Twitter post
he’s got one of the more punchable faces in crypto
The problem with Bitcoin is it's the miners who are making all of the money verifying transactions. Bitcoin should move to proof of stake where the holders of Bitcoin get paid, but the miners will never move away from proof of work, because they are only interested in mining it and selling it into the market.
The bitcoin holders are the dumb money about to get rug pulled.
