Does this mean that Brendan's toenails are utterly worthless make believe? @Brendan Burgess - probably best not to make any travel plans to either China or India (although if you have a word with the Duke, he might be able to smooth things over with his CCP comrades).I have zero worries about a Brendan Burgess Toenail Mania.
It doesn't. It has one or maybe two, and those have perverted the original idea of bitcoin to enrich the founders and have undermined their foundations. They are all doomed to fail.Bitcoin has 10,000 kopykats. If gold had 10,000 kopykats what would it be worth?
Ah! The One True Faith and originated by a man of course. Where did I hear that before?It doesn't. It has one or maybe two, and those have perverted the original idea of bitcoin to enrich the founders and have undermined their foundations. They are all doomed to fail.
Crypto is not bitcoin. Crypto is a scam. The only thing crypto has in common with bitcoin is the blockchain and some of them don't even have that. All of them will hit zero eventually (it may take a LONG time as some of them have so many people mentally and financially invested inthem.) None of them has value independently of bitcoin. Sometimes they rise faster than Bitcoin but when bitcoin falls they fall. They have no inherent value. Web3, defi, nfts are all bs. The crypto market exists because people think they missed out on bitcoin.
Gold is a commodity. There are thousands of commodities. Not sure of your point. Maybe a comparison: Bitcoin is gold, the latest and greatest crypto is sand.
Buy a handful of sand and I'll "yield" you 10% more sand every year. I can do this because there's an almost limitless amount of sand.
As someone once said altcoins are just a way of people stealing your bitcoin.
I completely understand the scepticism. It's healthy. What I would say is separate bitcoin from crypto in your thinking. Crypto is a CONtagion.
I bought it years ago at under $300 and I'm looking at the price now and wishing I had money to spend. Read the bitcoin standard it's by a serious chap.
Dearie me! You do have to spell things out on the internet.Gold is a commodity. There are thousands of commodities. Not sure of your point.
[...] Laycock suggests that the union of Bitcoin and Christianity isn’t merely coincidental. He sees parallels between Bitcoin belief and a “paranoid streak of American evangelicalism,” which views the world as a battle between good and evil. Bitcoin devotees likewise believe that the cryptocurrency is “good money,” a righteous overhaul of a corrupt, international monetary system. [...]
Hole smokes!! There is so much in that link worth quoting. Let's start with:Well I've seen enough parallels even on this thread alone so I somewhat fail to be surprised by this.
It is all about the 'belief' innit !?
The People Who Are Finding God Through, and in, Bitcoin
Note again that the divine saviour was a male.There is even a self-proclaimed “Church of Bitcoin,” a small online community established by Henry Romp, a 30-year-old software developer who lives in Middlebury, Vermont. Romp infrequently holds “audio services” on Twitter during which he reads from Nakamoto’s famed 2008 white paper. His home in Vermont, which has the Church of Bitcoin’s logo on the front door, also has a library of books on Bitcoin that he gives to the crypto-curious. “When Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin, I think that he was divinely inspired,” he says, “that a benevolent God of some sort either sent him or sent him the idea.”
Like Strolight and Melder, Romp is a Christian. (However, he is quick to clarify that the Church of Bitcoin is not Christian and is expansive enough in its interpretation of Bitcoin’s divinity to include those from other religions.) He even went to the Thank God for Bitcoin conference in Miami earlier this year. And like his faith in God, his faith in Bitcoin is unwavering. “I am not shaken by the current fall,” he states, pointing out that the cryptocurrency’s price has crashed many times before.
Who are you, God? (and we'll get to that in a secondDearie me! You do have to spell things out on the internet.
I meant things that are metallic, heavy, malleable, non corruptible, glitter and basically very attractive to the human senses (like gold).
I'm glad someone has written some clickbait that satisfies your cognitive bias such that you believe that anyone who is enthusiastic about Bitcoin belongs to the extreme examples that they managed to find and feature in this article.Well I've seen enough parallels even on this thread alone so I somewhat fail to be surprised by this.
It is all about the 'belief' innit !?
The People Who Are Finding God Through, and in, Bitcoin
Damn right I do - and I will continue to do so - because the accusation stands. This is the way with everything claimed in the naysayer camp vis-a-vis Bitcoin. Take the most extreme examples and then tar and feather everyone that is in anyway associated with either Bitcoin or crypto on that basis. We had precisely the same nonsense when someone posted up that Guardian article of some drink and coke addict that engaged in latent gambling on poocoins with no idea of what he was trading.And @tecate accuses me of being insulting in calling it a cult.
Ripple (XRP) is a security.Ah! The One True Faith and originated by a man of course. Where did I hear that before?
So let me list bitcoin’s divine attributes according to the gospel by @tecate
Limited supply
Decentralised
Trustless
Censorship free
Fast transfer across borders
And let me pluck another sect at random and ask does it pass these tests (I don’t know) Ripple
Doesn't sound very decentralised to me.Ripple issued its entire supply of up to 100 billion tokens at launch—45.4 billion of which are “circulating” with the remainder held in reserve by Ripple itself.
Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Gary Gensler said Monday that bitcoin BTCUSD, 0.78% was the only cryptocurrency he was prepared to publicly label a commodity, rather than a security, in an interview with CNBC.
“Many of these tokens…the investing public is hoping for a return just like when they invest in other financial assets we call securities,” he said in an interview on Squawk Box. “Many of these financial assets, crypto financial assets have the key attributes of a security,” and are therefore under the SEC’s jurisdiction.
“Some like bitcoin, and that’s the only one I’m gonna say…my predecessors and others have said, they’re a commodity,” he added, noting this classification gives the Commodity Futures Trading Commission a key role in overseeing bitcoin markets.
Ok, I'll drop the kopykat argument. @tecate had given an even more persuasive line that Marmalade Coin could have the attributes I cited above but would not have bitcoin's adoption. So bitcoin is as unique as Coca Cola - no problem copying it, big problem rivalling it.Ripple (XRP) is a security.
Doesn't sound very decentralised to me.
Ripple is a corporation, Bitcoin is not.
Gensler labels bitcoin a 'commodity' as crypto prices stabilize
Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Gary Gensler said Monday that bitcoin was the only cryptocurrency he was prepared to publicly label a commodity,...www.marketwatch.com
It's more than that because network effects are involved. While there is a brand component with coke, ultimately if I decide, in isolation, to drink something else instead I don't need others to also switch with me.So bitcoin is as unique as Coca Cola - no problem copying it, big problem rivalling it.
Imagine instead someone launching askaboutmoney2.com as Ireland's consumer forum. It starts as an empty forum. Why does anyone use it instead of the orginal AAM? Even if someone does want to use it, maybe they've been banned here, or dislike Brendan, they can't switch in isolation, they need other users to switch too before it's any use at all.
That is both the protection and challenge for Bitcoin. It also has this issue to overcome itself in terms of adoption. Some folks have challenged its lack of progress when it comes to various use cases but particularly payments. Not only do we have fiat currencies with network effect, we have governments enforcing their use.It's more than that because network effects are involved.
What issues with BTC do you believe could be improved upon by another crypto* to effect this change?If someone sets up a better crypto than BTC, then it will probably take over.
lol.BTC might continue as a Ponzi Scheme for a while , but it will have no use as a currency.
Yes that makes sense. A key word in there is "utility".It's more than that because network effects are involved. While there is a brand component with coke, ultimately if I decide, in isolation, to drink something else instead I don't need others to also switch with me.
Imagine instead someone launching askaboutmoney2.com as Ireland's consumer forum. It starts as an empty forum. Why does anyone use it instead of the orginal AAM? Even if someone does want to use it, maybe they've been banned here, or dislike Brendan, they can't switch in isolation, they need other users to switch too before it's any use at all.
The utility of a coke is the same to you, regardless of how many others drink coke. The utility of a network to you is a function of the size of the network.
And if there was nothing there, then that would have meant that your thesis in 2017 would have been correct i.e. a classic boom to bust and Bitcoin pronounced dead at the end of it and a distant memory at this point. But that's not how this is playing out.Without any meaningful utility it must be doomed as Satoshi herself recognised.
But it's unlikely to be more popular at launch time. It would have to become more popular for good reasons. Even if it offered extra features like profile pics or whatever, you could always add similar to AAM.That is a good comparison.
If someone launches a better or more popular version, then it will grow bigger and askaboutmoney will decline.
Another aspect is that I think it's even tougher in the arena of open systems. There might only be a handful of backgammon sites, but there's already 1000s of cryptos all competing with each other first and foremost. Even if a 'better one' is among them it might not get noticed at all. They are crabs in a bucket each stealing attention and resources from each other and making it extremely difficult for any one of them to get the resources and attention it needs to surpass bitcoin. It seems Bitcoin had a huge advantage in being first, and that aspect can't be replicated.If someone sets up a better crypto than BTC, then it will probably take over. BTC might continue as a Ponzi Scheme for a while , but it will have no use as a currency.
The utility of a coke is the same to you, regardless of how many others drink coke. The utility of a network to you is a function of the size of the network.
Maybe we are getting confused with semantics. The value of a "network" depends on what the underlying is used for - its utility. Now the network of a telephone system is everything. A network of Coke users (The Real Thing not that illicit stuff where network probably does matter) is irrelevant. A network of other posers is needed for a site like AAM. A network of retail and other outlets is essential for a currency qua medium of exchange.Duke whether bitcoin has utility is obviously an entirely different issue, and not one I have anything new to say on, so I'll save my breath.
It depends on the size of the network. The fact that people are members of the network implies it has use to them, or else why are they members of it?Maybe we are getting confused with semantics. The value of a "network" depends on what the underlying is used for - its utility.
In short: holding bitcoin involves obtaining bitcoin which creates demand for bitcoin. Demand of something limited in supply creates a non-zero price on the open market.But so what if bitcoin has the most holders? How does that give it any worth?
Network sounds impressive. I suggest that the vast majority of bitcoin holders are not there because of its network effect. They are having a punt.The fact that people are members of the network implies it has use to them, or else why are they members of it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?