Let me throw in ...that if you had a polished rock (other than gold), does it have the same value? They're used for personal adornment and home decor - but yet they don't have a value anything like gold. At some stage you folks will acknowledge the importance of scarcity in this dynamic. Cynthia Lummis does. As does Tom Fitzpatrick - MD of Citibank - in his recent report on bitcoin where he estimates price potential of $300k/btc within 12 months.Let me throw in that this base metal was highly toxic and stank to high heaven. @tecate would it achieve store of value status?
As usual you didn't answer the question. I will guess that your answer is that no matter how obnoxious and useless the base metal is, its scarcity is enough to give it store of value status. We'll have to agree to differ on that one.Let me throw in ...that if you had a polished rock (other than gold), does it have the same value? They're used for personal adornment and home decor - but yet they don't have a value anything like gold. At some stage you folks will acknowledge the importance of scarcity in this dynamic. Cynthia Lummis does. As does Tom Fitzpatrick - MD of Citibank - in his recent report on bitcoin where he estimates price potential of $300k/btc within 12 months.
That wasn't my answer - you got my answer, Duke. It seems yet again, you don't like my answer - but so be it.As usual you didn't answer the question. I will guess that your answer is that no matter how obnoxious and useless the base metal is, its scarcity is enough to give it store of value status. We'll have to agree to differ on that one.
But scarcity on its own does not confer store of value as per Satoshi's thought experiment.
Point well made, Wolfie. There's never been an acknowledgement of the fact that bitcoin has its own positive attributes (over and above absolute scarcity) from the crypto-critics amongst us. It's these positive attributes that has an ever increasing number of commentators suggesting that bitcoin is superior to gold.You are deliberately subtracting another property....the special, magical property....."can be transported over a communications channel" and adding your own properties - toxicity and stinky, that when combined, serve the BOHA position well - but that is a wholly different proposition to bitcoin.
You can persist with this nonsense all you want, Leo. I understand that's your belief - but I won't be buying what you're selling here. Others can make u their own minds.
AAMs crypto-deniers.
YOU brought up blockstream - if you'd like to expand on that (rather than just drop it there) - then fill your boots. Either way, I don't give a fiddlers.
You've long since used up any goodwill in these discussions.
Ahh we are making progress. It needs something else other than scarcity alone to bootstrap its value.I'm not claiming that scarcity in and of itself is sufficient
Maybe you really see a 'false claim', Leo - but that's your issue, not mine. I threw out nothing except your disingenuous engagement in this discussion - and I'll continue to call you on it.I'm sorry, but it appears you want to continue to make false claims and then start throwing out the accusations when challenged? This isn't Trump's twitter!
I'm not playing your games. You brought it up - now justify what you brought up ...or don't Leo - I honestly don't give a fiddlers.Let's pretend I never mentioned Blockstream.
Once again, you don't like the answers that you're getting - that's the distinction.I'd settle for a straight answer.
Firstly, we were talking about gold in that specific instance. If we're switching back to bitcoin, then be aware that bitcoin brings absolute scarcity into the frame - gold does not. As a store of value however, I do agree that all characteristics of a good store of value are important. You'll appreciate that we covered that previously.Ahh we are making progress.
Says who? You? With all due respect, that's your opinion and it's an opinion that I and many would take issue with. See Wolfies post above - there's never been an acknowledgement of other positive traits that bitcoin brings to the table. To my point, you've just trashed another one of them in your last post.Being able to transfer it over long distances, being trustless, being censorship free etc. do not of themselves provide that magic ingredient.
A complete understanding of satoshi's thoughts on the matter is speculative. Yes, you can cite a couple of statements but lets not assume that those isolated statements are/were his/her/their full understanding and belief. At the end of the day, the decision was taken to launch the bitcoin network.Satoshi suggested some candidates for the magic ingredient e.g. that it might become a collector's item.
Dukey, there's nothing wrong with disagreeing. What I've had an issue with over the course of these three years is an unwillingness on the crypto-critic side of the discussion to accept that bitcoin has the opportunity to continue to grow and expand. Not to believe that to be the case but to be open to it.but where I disagree is that I don't think it ever will achieve the penetration needed to support current price levels.
What I've had an issue with over the course of these three years is an unwillingness on the crypto-critic side of the discussion to accept that bitcoin has the opportunity to continue to grow and expand. Not to believe that to be the case but to be open to it.
I'm not playing your games. You brought it up - now justify what you brought up ...or don't Leo - I honestly don't give a fiddlers.
Once again, you don't like the answers that you're getting - that's the distinction.
Satoshi. I don't think you really understood the thought piece.Says who?
And the proof keeps coming in buckets, Leo. This is the guy who proclaimed that he's here to learn - with a genuine engagement to the discussion with the inference that others (ergo, me) don't.I get it, you can't admit you're wrong.
It is possible to utilise that satellite feed in combination with other technologies like mesh networking and high frequency radio. Those are in early stages of development but it is something that is being worked on. Other than that, there is no technical obstacle that I'm aware of to 2-way satellite communication so should that nature of censorship come about, blockstream can deploy it.Just in case anyone else is in any doubt, it is not possible today to transact bitcoin over satellite.
I'm no fan of Blockstream but what 'hype' are you referring to? How have they been wayward in their communication about this project? Can you provide a link to demonstrate that claim?Some have fallen for the Blockstream hype (they're well known for it).
What nobody has missed at this stage Leo - is the disingenuity of your engagement on the matter. You can scream blue bloody murder and expect someone else to entertain your disingenuous games but don't expect me to do so.Did I miss where you explained how to send a transaction via an existing satellite service without internet connection?
Incorrect. See my previous post. As I've mentioned to you before, I've listened to plenty of discussions surrounding Satoshi's thoughts - and nobody has presumed to know what they are. You're the first. Taking one musing because it fits your narrative doesn't qualify Duke.Satoshi. I don't think you really understood the thought piece.
If that's the case Leo, you can explain to everyone why you couldn't simply explain the blockstream satellite proposition? It was after all YOU who brought them up. Can you explain why you had to badger me for that info over the course of a number of subsequent posts, holding back that information yourself?
Clearly, it's the same 'gotcha' mentality that's your objective here as we see his Dukeness present with.
What nobody has missed at this stage Leo - is the disingenuity of your engagement on the matter. You can scream blue bloody murder and expect someone else to entertain your disingenuous games but don't expect me to do so.
YOU brought up Blockstream - but you wouldn't expand on that when prompted.I mentioned the Blockstream option after you repeatedly failed to explain your claim that sending bitcoin via satellite without an internet connection was possible.
You were asked to provide evidence of this 'hype' and again, nothing. The irony here is that you've tried to claim over the course of three years that I have not answered your questions. The reality is that you have conveniently ignored all manner of points put to you.I suspected you might have fallen for their false hype
See that's where you're 100% wrong Leo. You were asked to explain why you brought the Blockstream project into the conversation - and you downright refused on a number of occasions when THAT information would have been much easier to supply. The motivations behind you holding that info back are disingenuous.But yet again you choose not to back up your claim when surely it would be much easier to do so,
EH, no Leo - it's not. It's a response to blatant disingenuity on your part.No, it's frustration at your repeatedly posting factually incorrect statements and then just trying to badger anyone who dares question you into submission.
Firstly, people are free to post or otherwise. That has nothing to do with me - so don't suggest for a second that it has. That in itself is disingenous. You mean the attempts to drown me out haven't gone to plan.Several other posters have given up posting in this section because of your diversion and repeated refusal to accept when you are wrong.
You do know that the nature of your engagement here isn't in any way conducive to a free and open discussion. As regards backing up claims, there's nobody here that has cited and referenced more external sources in backing up such claims.You do know that asking you to back up a claim is not being disingenuous, right? I'm asking you to confirm your statement, there is no lie in that.
YOU brought up Blockstream - but you wouldn't expand on that when prompted.
You do know that the nature of your engagement here isn't in any way conducive to a free and open discussion.
You downright refused to do so initially.I already expanded on that! Twice!
Maybe you actually believe your own BS Leo - but I'm having none of it.Yet again, you just break a post into a long diatribe in an attempt to distract from your errors.
Double standards much, Leo? That's a bare faced lie.Your approach attacking any dissenting voices has killed off any hope of a conducive discussion.
And its just coincidence that we're talking about a group of crypto-deniers and AAM regulars like yourself, Leo? Tell me - how many anti-bitcoin (and that's what they are!) posters have you banned from this forum?Most, myself included have long given up on any hopes for such a conversation.
My, how fortunate we are Leo. Thank you for your service.So now, I settle myself with calling out lies or misleading information where I see them.
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?