Bitcoin Forum

---

Bitcoin is more than a technology:  Bitcoin is a social phenomenon.  And it is the first mass social movement in history that does not propose any opinion other than its own value.

People who disagree with each other about everything else, can agree about Bitcoin.  That is what gives Bitcoin its value:  Everybody wants Bitcoin, no matter what their opinions about anything else!  And that is what makes Bitcoin immune to financial censorship.  There are people from completely opposite ends of the political spectrum who came to Bitcoin, because big banks disliked them, closed their accounts, and shut them out of the fiat financial system.

It’s scary that banks can impose an unwritten law of their own, with no accountability and no appeal, just by closing people’s accounts.  Bitcoin stops that.

I have experience living without a bank account.  It’s very difficult:  You can’t use money normally, and you are shut out of many opportunities.  That can impoverish you, and it can keep you in poverty.  Bitcoin takes away the power of unaccountable corporations to shut down people’s lives on a whim, just because they don’t like them.

You may dislike me, you may disagree with me, you may condemn me—you may even decide that you hate me.  But we both agree that Bitcoin has value; and Bitcoin itself is absolutely unbiased between us.  This is what gives Bitcoin its power—and this is how Bitcoin empowers anybody who wants to use it.  If I decide that I hate you, we still agree on Bitcoin—and we can’t tell each other what to do with Bitcoin.

Bitcoin’s freedom attracted many people.  This gave Bitcoin some value; and in turn, Bitcoin’s value attracted more people, which gave Bitcoin even more value.  Thus, its value comes from its power as a social phenomenon, and not directly from the ingenious technology which enables that social phenomenon.

---

The Bitcoin technology is easy to duplicate (https://web.archive.org/web/20190425155533/https://forkgen.tech/).  But the Bitcoin social movement cannot be duplicated.  It exists because everybody agrees on Bitcoin.  People all over the world, of every race and nationality, of every religion, of every political opinion, all agree on Bitcoin.  Their agreements or disagreements about anything else are irrelevant to Bitcoin.

That is why there is only one Bitcoin.

And that is why people who hate Bitcoin itself try to break it apart.  If there are many Bitcoins, then people don’t agree on Bitcoin anymore:  There is my Bitcoin, and there is your Bitcoin, and there is someone else’s Bitcoin.  That agreement I just described is broken up.  In the long term, if one Bitcoin splits into many Bitcoins, its value will not be divided up:  Its value will be zero, worthless.  Bitcoin has value because everybody agrees on Bitcoin.  If there are many Bitcoins, then none of them has value, because none of them has everybody’s agreement.

Fortunately, Bitcoin is resilient against this type of attack.  I can easily make my own fork of Bitcoin, and declare to the world that this is the new Bitcoin.  You will just laugh at me, and keep using Bitcoin.  It turns out that trying to break up everybody’s agreement is like trying to stop a moving train by stepping in front of it.  People who do that are deliberately excluding themselves from “everybody”.  Their pretend-“Bitcoins” just get crushed and left behind, as everybody keeps using Bitcoin.

That is why most pretend-“Bitcoin” forks quickly slide away into total irrelevance.  The only ones which hang on with a relatively minuscule market share are the ones backed by rich people who have lots of money to risk attempting to manipulate the market, and organized propaganda to scam people into believing that their pretend-“Bitcoin” is Bitcoin.

---

It would be difficult to attack Bitcoin with wealth alone.  Bitcoin and its value are supported by too many people, rich and poor.  A rich market manipulator who backs a forked fake-“Bitcoin” may see some short-term gains, especially from pump-and-dump market manipulation.  But in the long term, he will probably lose lots of money:  His scam-coin is competing with Bitcoin, which is collectively backed by the economic resources of too many people all over the world, rich and poor alike.

But the scam becomes dangerous when the fake-“Bitcoin” is promoted with cunning propaganda to fool people into believing that it’s the real Bitcoin.

---

Newbies and people who never used Bitcoin may wonder why Bitcoiners get angry about fake-“Bitcoin” forks.

Some of that anger is principled outrage.  There are people who deeply believe in Bitcoin’s principles of financial freedom.  Some of them have devoted to those principles their careers, their passions—they have devoted their lives to Bitcoin!  Of course, they will be angry when they see Bitcoin attacked by liars and scammers promoting fake-“Bitcoin”.

More broadly, many people are morally outraged when they see lies, scams, and identity theft (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215128.0).  Of course, people get angry at criminals.

But there is also another reason:  If you have any Bitcoin, whether you have 1000 BTC or only a few precious satoshis, then an attack on Bitcoin is an attack on your wallet.  You may or may not care about Bitcoin’s noble principles.  You will defend those principles, to defend the value of your money.

Part of the genius of Bitcoin is that it turns greed and selfishness toward the common good:  If you have Bitcoin, you want to protect your savings, so you must stand against people who try to devalue it.  Otherwise, you risk losing your savings.

Everybody who has Bitcoin, has an incentive to protect Bitcoin.  If you have Bitcoin, then you are making the world a better place when you defend the value of your own money.  You can’t avoid protecting Bitcoin, if you want to protect your own money.  And if you have Bitcoin, then an attack against Bitcoin is not only an attack against some idealistic theory:  It’s a financial attack on you, personally!  Of course, you should be angry about that.

Whether you are selfish or altruistic—whether or not you give a hoot about making the world a better place—I urge you to rally behind Bitcoin, and stand up against scammers who make fake-“Bitcoins”.  Do it for noble principles.  Or just do it to protect your own money.  If nothing else, it would be stupid of you to ignore scammers who are trying to trash the value of your money.  By standing together, we can stop them:  Expose their lies, shred their scam propaganda, and make sure that new market entrants and the general public know:  There is only one Bitcoin, your Bitcoin, which has value because it is everybody’s Bitcoin.

If you, dear reader, are a business shark who sneers at idealistic theories, then surely you will immediately understand the danger of consumer confusion from fraudulent dilution of Bitcoin’s brand.  It’s a practical danger, a danger to you.

If you are invested in Bitcoin, it pays for you to protect Bitcoin.

Re-read everything I said above—viewing it as a prospectus statement on Bitcoin’s fundamentals, and not a political or philosophical tract.  Bitcoin has solid fundamentals and an excellent long-term market prospect.  Like any investment, there are risks; one of Bitcoin’s risks is dilution and confusion from fork-attacks.

In cut-and-dry business terms, a savvy strategy is to invest in Bitcoin for its upside, while actively protecting it against that potential downside.  It’s in your best interest to be an active investor (and to some degree, an activist investor).  That way, you enjoy the growth potential of a unique socioeconomic phenomenon that cannot be duplicated—while actively minimizing your risks, instead of just passively questioning whether the risks are worthwhile.

Indeed, there are few opportunities in investing for actively minimizing your risks.  This should change your calculation of Bitcoin’s risk:  Part of that calculation is your own willingness to protect Bitcoin.

There are actually people who think that bitcoin "has no value"; and one of the most famous people who thinks that, well, we all know the dude:


The good thing though, is that it doesn't matter that he thinks! The market decided(via supply and demand) that the current price is $8100(as we speak), so it doesn't matter if he thinks bitcoin has no value! It's one of the beauties of open markets.

With that said, you should create a Medium account lol.

I'm going to be short on this excellent write-up.

There are people that truly understand Bitcoin, not necessarily how it works, but why the world needs it and from where it derives value. This is in stark contrast to people like Roger Ver, who have no idea what they're talking about, at least when it comes to their statements regarding Bitcoin. There is only one Bitcoin, and there can never be another. Not a forked Bitcoin, not a Bitcoin 2.0, just Bitcoin. The one and only. If Bitcoin fails, all the copycat "Bitcoins" fail too.

I urge people to do this quite often, but the lack of action is also quite noticeable. Maybe thread How you can help Bitcoin if you aren't a developer would be helpful? ;)

Too many trackers and attempts at data gathering, thus I'd not suggest this to OP even though I know that your intent is genuine.

Bitcoin has a subtle value that goes beyond its current valuation in open markets.  If Bitcoin’s value were purely speculative, then I would agree that it has no value at all:  It actually would be a Ponzi scheme, with earlier fools trying to sell the scheme itself at a higher price to later fools.  But Bitcoin’s value is not merely speculative:  Bitcoin is much more than an expectation of future value!

Bitcoin is a single, unified monetary platform that everybody can use to exchange value with each other.  They don’t need to trust each other, or even like each other.  They don’t need to ask each other’s permission, or anybody’s permission.  It is this agreement which creates demand.  And that agreement is not “buy low, sell high” market speculation.  This agreement, facilitated by technology, in turn facilitates trade.  Simply, it helps people live life better.

That itself is valuable!

I am not in Bitcoin because I want it to “moon”.  I am in Bitcoin because it makes my life better—just as it can make your life better, and make everybody’s life better.  It is true that as more people discover Bitcoin, its valuation will increase due to increased demand for a limited supply.  I like that, but I think it’s an ancillary benefit.


I don’t usually do the “user-generated content” thing, i.e. working for free for somebody else’s business.  And if I do, I would prefer to do it for the Bitcoin Forum!

(Also, what Lauda said...)

---

Good point.  That is why I created this thread.  We need clearer positive statements of what Bitcoin is, why it is valuable, and why people should care.

Above, I put some effort into explaining those points (and more!) in simple, familiar terms that anybody can understand.  To all readers of this thread:  Please feel free to adapt my own arguments to your own discussions with other people, when you are trying to tell them about Bitcoin and it seems they just don’t understand.  Of course, it also helps to link to this post elsewhere, if you feel that others should read it.

We also need better organized efforts to get the word out.  That’s what I am working to achieve right here—at least, one small part.  A beginning.  We can work together to bring the Bitcoin social phenomenon to the next level of its development!

...sometimes all it takes is a seed, or a spark of an idea to set growth or
a fire in motion, something that sunlight or the air itself can fuel and
accellerate the growth making that seed or spark transform into
something great and wonderful for all to enjoy and benefit from.

Such is Bitcoin, Satoshi created that seed and spark and we the adopters
can add fuel to make it bigger than the initial idea.

Something to chew on right in the middle of the week. I do share many of the sentiments, but definitely not all. And there is enough variety of sentiment in the post for many like and unlike me to choose from, yet as you say, we are all here on common ground called Bitcoin.

1. Not everyone wants Bitcoin though.
2. Not everyone who has gone against it or attacked it hates Bitcoin. Those who profess hatred like those unnamed forkcoiners still have enough sense to actually have Bitcoin. Those I know who've built alternatives or chosen alternative don't hate it at all, and in fact feel like they owe it to themselves to leave, but continue to wish Bitcoin well. I know how that feels like so I can understand.
3. As much as it pays us to protect Bitcoin, it goes without saying it pays others threatened by Bitcoin to protect their way of life too =)

I liked the text in general. It's text and style makes it relatable and attractive. However, I think that sometimes some points are radicalised.
1. It's not like everyone agrees that Bitcoin is valuable. Otherwise if would cost way more, and these would not be people saying it's a financial pyramid that will crash soon.
2. Some people might genuinely believe that Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SV are the true ones, and I think they have the right to this opinion, even though I agree that these forks put Bitcoin at risk.
3. I am not sure, but perhaps Bitcoin is largely used by a certain social group, even though some people from various groups use it, of course.
Edit: I've finished the post before the one by buwaytress appeared, but I can see that some points and the style are similar which looks awkward.

It's difficult to succinctly summarise why Bitcoin has value because it's a combination of many things all coming together as one.  It does take a while to absorb and consider all the different facets and it's likely the reason people don't always "get it" right away.  And in some cases, they sadly never understand at all.

To start off, I'm reminded of that line from 'V for Vendetta':
So firstly it's that guaranteed certainty that there is absolutely no way of undoing what has been done.  This can't be un-invented.  People are going to pursue this idea relentlessly for the rest of forever.  It can't be killed.  Throw whatever obstacles you want in our path, we're not stopping.

Secondly, it's about the underlying principles that attracted the earliest adopters.  At a time when the bitcoins being mined had a fiat value of a fraction of a cent, it had very little to do with speculation.  So what was it that drew these people in?  People saw something they liked, something they could get behind, something they could believe in.  Something that quite literally changed the world and opened up some pretty amazing possibilities.  People could recognise this from just looking at it.  Yet, for some reason, these crucially important qualities of open-source, permissionless, censorship resistant, trustlessness, limited supply, etc are normally the first thing many altcoins sacrifice, usually in favour of some lame marketing gimmick.  It's baffling.  People clearly want those fundamental things at the heart of it.

Next up is the facet that Bitcoin found its equilibrium almost instantly with an economic incentive to secure the chain.  Other chains have failed spectacularly at maintaining this alignment of incentives and have proven more profitable to attack than they have been to secure.  

The security itself is a factor as well.  And Bitcoin is still the most secure of them all.  Bar none.  No contest.  You want cheaper and faster?  You're going to have to sacrifice some security.  That's just how it is.

Then there's the workforce.  An ever-growing army of developers who work tirelessly to improve the base protocol and other devs that are focused on new layers built on top.  The fact that many contributors have done this work totally unpaid over the years speaks volumes to that second point about believing in what we're doing.  Few coins can match the raw pace of development we possess.  Fewer still can match the quality and stability of the code our devs produce.

Utility is clearly something that will help define value.  Network effects naturally increase with more users.  The more people who accept Bitcoin and the more places you can spend it, the larger our economy grows.  It's only going to become more useful over time.  This, in turn attracts yet more users.  

And, while it should go without saying because it's one of the most important parts, it's about decentralisation.  Another one of those bits that can't be replicated or cloned.  You can copy the code, but you can't copy the actual human beings who all choose THIS code.  I'm sure I've said it a hundred times before, but code means nothing if no one runs it.  

So while people can say simple things like "no one can censor or reverse your transaction", "transact with who you want, when you want", "be your own bank", etc, there's so much that goes into making those advantages possible.  It only works with all of the ingredients.    

Well said. The drawback of this (if there is one) is the difficulty by which a cohesive hard fork could ever be achieved. The legacy protocol has become sacrosanct, so changes implemented by hard fork -- like Confidential Transactions or future block size increases -- are likely to lead to permanent network splits. Outside of an existential bug fix, it's becoming more and more difficult to imagine a Bitcoin hard fork where the new network is known as "Bitcoin."

And again, maybe that's a good thing...

Arguably, bitcoin has always had a value - as Bitcoin is/was a value proposition from the moment of inception.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_proposition

"A value proposition is a promise of value to be delivered, communicated, and acknowledged."

The actual production costs of bitcoin have always included the price of an internet connection, metered electricity, computer equipment and perhaps (factored) depreciation of said computer equipment.

The above is what provided the very first bitcoin exchange rates in 2009, formulas to calculate actual cost or intrinsic value ...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost

"In production, research, retail, and accounting, a cost is the value of money that has been used up to produce something or deliver a service, and hence is not available for use anymore..."

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_value_(finance) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_value_(finance))

"In finance, intrinsic value or fundamental value is the "true, inherent, and essential value" of an asset independent of its market value..."

- http://newlibertystandard.wikifoundry.com/page/Exchange+Rate

"... The exchange rate is the average of the adjusted bitcoin production per day divided by the average production costs per day. The per day averages start with the previous day and will eventually extend back 365 days, but until then, they increase by half a day each day by taking the average of two averages. Production costs consist of the price of broadband Internet and metered electricity. The adjusted bitcoin production is the following spreadsheet calculation =if(M2>N2,((B2+F2)/2)*(1/(3-((N2/M2)*2))),((B2+F2)/2)*(3-((M2/N2)*2))) where M2 is the available balance of dollars times the exchange rate of that same day, N2 is the available balance of bitcoins, B2 is the amount of bitcoins produced the previous day and F2 is the average of the adjusted bitcoin production per day..."

http://newlibertystandard.wikifoundry.com/page/2009+Exchange+Rate

"During 2009 my exchange rate was calculated by dividing $1.00 by the average amount of electricity required to run a computer with high CPU for a year, 1331.5 kWh, multiplied by the the average residential cost of electricity in the United States for the previous year, $0.1136, divided by 12 months divided by the number of bitcoins generated by my computer over the past 30 days..."

...

Many early adopters, myself included, suffered great opportunity cost in regards to enthusiastically helping to bootstrap the Bitcoin (value) network.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

"When an option is chosen from alternatives, the opportunity cost is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit associated with the best alternative choice..."

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_network

"A value network is a business analysis description that graphically illustrates social and technical resources within and between an organization and how they are utilized. The nodes in a value network represent people (or roles)..."

Hence, There ain't no such thing as a free lunch ...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_ain't_no_such_thing_as_a_free_lunch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_ain't_no_such_thing_as_a_free_lunch)

Scarcity value and Price discovery contribute more towards bitcoins actual value today of course.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarcity_value

"Scarcity value is the economic factor that increases an item's relative price based upon artificially low supply..."

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discovery

"The price discovery process (also called price discovery mechanism) is the process of determining the price of an asset in the marketplace through the interactions of buyers and sellers..."

Bitcoin is by definition the true digital form of Commodity money.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money

"Commodity money is money whose value comes from a commodity of which it is made. Commodity money consists of objects having value or use in themselves (intrinsic value) as well as their value in buying goods..."

Also see: Kaei "Branch money" ...
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_currency

...

As for the OP: Bitcoin: The Social Phenomenon - I found the following to be very enlightening ...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_phenomenon

"Social phenomena include all behavior that influences or is influenced by organisms sufficiently alive to respond to one another. [citation needed]

There is also internet phenomenon" ...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_phenomenon

(Redirected from Internet phenomenon) ...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_meme

The original Bitcoin / Satoshi meme of course being ... "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

...

We all live and learn! Pizzas "and" haircuts aside ...

- https://web.archive.org/web/20100114172032/http://www.bitcoin.org/node/1

 ;)

...

Philomena Cunk Money "Moments of Wonder."
- https://youtu.be/Z-YKw8w-e50

That's Bitcoin governance for you. But important decisions, especially that requires a hard fork, should arrive at consensus. That's a feature, not a bug.

Remember when the top Bitcoin merchants, with the help of a powerful cartel of miners, tried to co-opt Bitcoin? 8)

For those who are not devs they can help people about knowing what is bitcoin and how it can be used. What its pros and cons are and how it differs from fiat currencies.

While doing such promotions, one may face a lot of arguments that bitcoin might be a ponzi and a so on. So one should keep handy the the things that has been said in bitcoin wiki which can help counter some of the arguments, though not all. There are people who are hardcore anti-bitcoin, one might not want to attempt to convert them.

It is difficult to understand who might be the correct target population of such discussions but discussing among those who already know about bitcoin is less helpful though it might "feel good" because they all agree with you. It is important to teach people who do not know about bitcoin or have some little bit of exposure to it. They will be hostile towards your approach but this is what comes as the challenge.  ;)

A lot of people never believed bitcoin could thrive this long and eventually gain such a large community that include even the powerful people in the world. It is easy to develop such a financial social movement when its idea is relevant and solve problems. There are still room for improvement in some years when it get more adoption. It has grown to a large network as blockchain to altcoins, and impacting other phases of life from health to energy with physical impact to human existence. Crypto ecosystem has come to stay and improve the world at large.

A good presentation about social life especially Bitcoin. Everyone who has bitcoin will definitely feel threatened and uncomfortable when there is negative news about bitcoin.
This is natural because they feel they have full bitcoin in their wallet. Whatever they will do to defend something they think is theirs.
Hopefully this thread can be crowded with a variety of opinions from other members because it is quite interesting what is stated from the explanation above.  :)

I think that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies can become a whole lot more social if companies that specialize in social media like Facebook or twitter get involved. Facebook is poised to launch its Libra platform and Libra stablecoin that could potentially revolutionize the way that we interact with cryptocurrency. As of now cryptocurrency is limited to those who are technically literate but platforms like Libra will simplify the process making adoption more widespread and accessible.

Libra, by design, is not a decentralized cryptocurrency. It is a centrally controlled, FIAT based, distributed ledger technology.

Read my post above. Bitcoin is a Commodity money. Libra is a Representative money.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_money

Also ...

"New to Bitcoin? Please, don't be confused.

It's pretty simple. Everything not bearing the ticker BTC is not Bitcoin. So always demand the real thing (which can be bought & used in little pieces called sats!), and at all times, avoid scams & copycats.

Now you're good to go. 👊"


- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1201835155725455361

...

#DeleteFacebook

This is why we have to help each other and keep on supporting bitcoin, there are so many haters but I believe one day bitcoin will hit them literally and prove to them that they are wrong and we can use bitcoin on out major financial transactions. Banking industry feel the threat, they know it and this is why most of them hate this technology. Stay positive, bitcoin will never give up so you also have to keep on fighting and don’t listen to the noise of haters.

The thing for me that makes Bitcoin so powerful is that it is universally known as the face of the cryptocurrency economy. It crosses all country boundaries and is independent of corporations and governments.

The value of things is NOT the value of production. It is your perceived value, how useful it is to you in your context and moment. Your smartphone (depleted battery) vs water in a desert, or refrigerators in the north pole.

the characteristics of bitcoin is what gives it value, not what it cost was to mine it. Of course, there is less incentive to mine it if the market value goes under production value. But the sole fact that there is demand at all, means it is useful to enough people to give it that value.

I don't agree with medium. I'd rather not go offsite to read and comment on articles.

bitcoin does not depend on anyone and free bitcoin can not be controlled, and that makes bitcoin very strong and very difficult to be dropped by people or institutions. maybe price movements can go up and down but people's trust in bitcoin remains good.

There's nothing exciting about Libra. It's a digital version of the Federal Reserve, but controlled by the tech-corporations who want to truly rule the world instead of the big banks.

I believe there was a saying about controlling a nation's currency, to control the nation.

Back to topic, chaoscoinz didn't get what social consensus means. The success of this is the best example of social consensus, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1805060.0

This is one of the main understandings of irrational theory that people simply refuse to understand. That value, while generally following a thread of logic, also can be completely based on what might appear to be nothing to the rational observer.

As much as I find myself thrilled by Bitcoin, I could not, for example, 2 years ago explain why it was worth $20,000 when it was months ago not, when I valued it as much.

Nor can I explain how people are willing to buy supposedly rare items online that can possibly still be manufactured without anyone being able to tell the difference (I'm thinking diamonds here).

But no two networks are the same. I'm talking about finality.

A Bitcoin confirmation is worth more/more secure than a confirmation on another network/blockchain. Plus Bitcoin has the most competent developers in the world of cryptocurrency development in my opinion.

exactly. the only reason why people started looking at irrelevant things to speculate the value is that they couldn't predict the bitcoin price so they needed things like hashrate that could be measured.
but what they forget is that miners are workers that are getting paid. if the economy is good their check is fatter so more workers are sign up for employment and if the economy is bad their check shrinks so some of them quit their job.
in the end the economy is there. bitcoin continues providing its utilities whether the employees are getting paid a lot or a little.

Which is why we ideally need to steer the conversation with the general public more towards the tangible benefits they can gain from actually using Bitcoin, rather than the fiat money they may or may not make speculating with it.

The only "reason" prices move like they do is that markets are fickle and traders are seemingly quite susceptible to hype and FOMO.  It doesn't really make a lot of sense and it's certainly not very easy to explain to the uninitiated masses in simple terms.

The same thing can actually be said of gold, that is if people will decide that it has no value then the demand for it will plummet and its corresponding value can be reduced a lot. This same principle is operating with Bitcoin and that is the fact. It is the people who are deciding what an asset will have value and how much is the value that people will be accepting. Of course, there are many factors and principles at play here.

What OP presented here is actually (or should be) an eye-opener to all of us even including people who are into Bitcoin but are still doubting on its value and its future. Bitcoin is empowering all of us but things are on our hands...we have the power to make it worthless or we can make it truly valuable as it should be.

All of this makes me realized one thing:
I am so lucky I have met bitcoin.

There are people who doesn't have any confidence to try something new, something social friendly technology. But the fact that we are spending our money and time to a fully worthy technology like Bitcoin is  definitely- a gift. They just complicate things, but the bottom line here is. Bitcoin has a significant value which can be helpful to some investors like us.

Everyone is pretty much into bitcoin investment honestly. Sure there might be people who are against bitcoin's ways and more probably are not really impressed or interested on bitcoin's abilities but everyone has this desire in them. The only thing that drawing them back is their mindset. Glad that a lot of people are slowly coming out of their shells and are making their way little by little in the cryptocurrency world.

Trading, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are in demand for those people who are interested with these things most especially when they know the benefits that they can get and they can earn. Most of the people refuse to believe in this kind of job because their first impression to it is its a scam because their people against to the crypto world most especially in bitcoin thats why they kept on discouraging other people from joining here in crypto world.

Do you think that something as phenomenal as bitcoin in the financial sphere is waiting for us in the future?

Bitcoin is in the financial sphere... and bitcoin is the thing that you have been waiting for.  If you are trying to refer to some other nonsense such as defi phoney baloney then you should be considering that those systems are better built upon bitcoin, to the extent that they are going to be secure.

In other words, Bitcoin is the change that you have been waiting for.. so it is just a matter of building upon bitcoin.  Don't get me wrong, I am NOT completely denigrating the various innovations on a variety of shitcoins, including the various projects on ethereum, but we should be attempting to keep our eyes on the prize (which is bitcoin) and understand a lot of those projects to be serving as mere testing grounds to the extent that they might either be added to bitcoin or perhaps become some second or third layer appendage to bitcoin... They are not the innovation in themselves, which is bitcoin and bitcoin's security and resolution of the double spend problem through proof of work and other already existing bitcoin protocol dynamics.

As we adopt many new technologies and innovations in our daily living same is the case with the Bitcoin. It is also one the best invention made by the human minds. Instead of focusing on the risky part if you put your focus on its value and the benefits it offer, you will surely realize its value. It is the best investment method that traders should adopt for good earning.

Why you guys are always mixing "Bitcoin" and "investment". From a currency decentralized it's now an online investment with people hoping to become rich... :-\ using centralized companies on the top of that. If a day the price goes down to $1 they will disappear. People who truly need to use Bitcoin as a payment mean will stay.
Decentralization or not, people don't care anymore, cryptography or not people don't give a shit, privacy or not doesn't matter.
From the xxx,xxx transactions daily, most of them are related to trading activity, how many are for the real uses cases.

I don't want to be an investor, I want to be someone who uses Bitcoin to buy this or that because I don't have other alternatives. If I want to play the investor game I go to buy an apartment and rent it to someone. If I want to gamble I go to buy a scratch ticket at 1€, it costs me less than a Bitcoin and I have probably more lucks to become "rich" if I buy many.

I truly think that the 'investor' mentality refrain Bitcoin to evolves indirectly

Do you really believe that any one person can assert what bitcoin is good for and  what it is not good for?

In the end, each person who gets involved in bitcoin decides for himself/herself (and even institutions and governments) regarding whether to get involved in bitcoin, which ways they believe bitcoin can serve them and how much to get involved.  Speculation and/or investment seems overlap at least a few of the seven network effects (referring to trace mayer's outline here) (https://twitter.com/tracemayer/status/934672438385954818?lang=en), and even if someone considers personal utility of bitcoin versus the utility that others might get from bitcoin, that is going to affect the persons perception of both present value and future value.

For example, someone in the more developed world might have a lot of access to a variety of means to transact, and they really have hardly any actual use for bitcoin, but that should not necessarily stop that same person to decide to buy into bitcoin as an investment based on perceptions regarding other use cases that others have and therefore speculate and invest into bitcoin regarding those perceptions of present or future utility.

You cannot really get away from either speculation and/or investment with any asset and it seems to be one of the more base level of the network effects.

OK, you got a point, but still:

If I take the tweet posted on the Seven Network Effects and more precisely with merchants and consumers. How are we supposed to increase the mass adoption concerning them if speculation is taking over merchants and consumers? Bitcoin is known as an investment and not an alternative currency.

A merchant will tell you he wants to be paid with money, not with stock option and he won't bother to look closely at it. No matter if you explain he can save on the fees charged by Visa card. Try yourself to talk with a merchant, he'll laugh, and he'll tell you he's not gonna bother where there's no demand. 1 consumer every 6 months interested to pay with bitcoins, yahoo!

Speculation is also the reason why administrations and governments start to bother us with regulations. It started to come at the same time around 2016.
What's the goal to create a digital currency decentralized if, in the end, we have the same problems, better to go back to fiat.

I doubt that we really need to worry or to rush into mass adoption, because bitcoin seems to serve its sound money design objective. If you have a money that is more sound than gold, then value is going to flow into bitcoin with the passage of time.  There seems to be little to no need to get all worried about whether I can spend my bitcoins today in the USA to buy coffee or whatever other small to medium sized transactions.

There are a lot of bitcoin naysayers or altcoin pumpers who engage in ongoing vague criticisms of bitcoin suggesting that bitcoin is not providing enough utility and accordingly suggesting that bitcoin is broken in some kind of way that urgently needs to be fixed, and I really  doubt that there is much if any basis in those kinds of claims because they seem to be built upon weak premises, suggesting that bitcoin is broken or deficient in some kind of way.

Speculation and investing seems to be a kind of necessity, and even if it was not specifically outlined by Satoshi, such dynamics underly ongoing adoption, which seems to me to be going at a sufficiently rapid pace.  There seems to me to be little to no need to rush adoption because it is ongoingly building sufficiently enough.  Bitcoin is getting into the consciousness of more and more people including financial people who want to short the fuck out of bitcoin, but bitcoin still keeps growing even while more financial instruments (that allow shorting) are building up around it.

Sure, if you have your skepticisms of bitcoin, then maybe you are not going to invest as much into it because you believe that there is something that is NOT quite right with bitcoin, and that choice is up to you. 

To me, it seems that bitcoin remains a sufficiently great asymmetric bet, but there are a whole hell-of-a-lot of people who don't even know what bitcoin is, even if they have heard the name, or they misunderstand what it is, because they heard that it was used by criminals or that it's CEO was arrested, but Lindy effect still suggests that the longer that bitcoin is around and holding a value the longer that people are going to recognize its value and with bitcoin's sound money and various metcalfe's law principles, there is no real reason that value will not continue to flow into bitcoin.. and cause more and more momentum into it, whether anyone markets bitcoin or not also it does not matter that a variety of shitcoins are creating budgets for themselves to market against bitcoin, the value is still going to flow into bitcoin, and sure it could take a decent amount of time to have large and widespread use, like you seem to be suggesting should already exist. 


Up to them, if they want to accept bitcoin or not.  I don't give any shits if they don't want to accept bitcoin, I will pay with dollars or credit cards or whatever.  Along with Greshams law, it is better for me to use the least valuable means of payment first.  I will pay with Bcash, if I had it and they would take it.


I don't think that we need to attempt to convince them.  If they want to take it, they will.


I agree merchant adoption has been pretty low... lightning network might help in that direction in the future.  I don't feel any rush to pay merchants.



governments have a variety of reasons in the way that they might get involved in bitcoin or crypto currencies.  In early 2014, in the USA
there was guidance from the IRS to treat bitcoin as capital gains.. so that discouraged using BTC for payments in the USA.  That might be a problem with lightning network too, in terms of getting people to spend their BTC in some jurisdictions.  In the end, bitcoin is multi-jurisdictional too, so if there are major fears of regulatory effects on BTC, those need to be considered in terms of the world-wide phenomenon of bitcoin, so even if some jurisdictions might attempt to crack down harder on bitcoin, they might also have to back down on their cracking down if it might be causing them some disadvantages in terms of bitcoin development going to other locations.. so various governments have to account for the multi-jurisdictional aspect of bitcoin and including ONLY so much that they can control, such as on-ramps and off-ramps.. but perhaps difficulties of controlling inside bitcoin.

Overall, I see you trying to paint bitcoin as having some kinds of problems or deficiencies, and I am a bit unclear why you are doing that?  You don't see any value in BTC?  How about being able to hold and retain value and to transfer that value anywhere in the world at any time without permission, is that valuable to you?  Do you believe that some kind of payments emphasis is better? Those are bcash (aka shitcoin) talking points that are largely bullshit, no?

Do you think that there is something wrong with where bitcoin's price is currently and where it seems likely to go?  There are BTC price prediction models such as: 1) the stock to flow model, 2) the four-year fractal model, 3) network effects (like I already mentioned) and 4) other similar sound money, adoption and Lindy Effects models that suggest our future BTC price direction to remain quite bullish and based on scarcity consideration.  Do you think that there are problems with the models or the direction of BTC prices based on some of these kinds sound money considerations?

It's really an awkward thing when people say Bitcoin hasn't stored a value which is really a ridiculous thing, It's not that thing that they have any belief on this system it's just the lack of communication, I think if they get proper knowledge about Bitcoin and it's growth then they might be passionate to this profitable platform if Bitcoin and cryptocurrency would get more accepted then the proper education based on blockchain system should be spread out, without proper education, nothing can be changed, so we should pay heed on the route of our society, I am sure it will work.

We can think of the ways through which we can create awareness among people about this grand technology. We can spread information to our family members, friends. We can also use social media as a biggest tool for creating awareness, by sharing our positive experiences. This will make people aware about the value of Bitcoin, they will stop believing on rumors and random posts and will come forward to invest in this market.

introducing people closest to you might be better because we can monitor them when it is already running in the industry, besides introducing this technology we can also control them so they are not trapped in fraudulent projects and keep them safe in the industry.

Actually now I am doing my own agenda in promting bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies and even the trading industry in other people closest to me. I am showing to them how my work here goes on and also how my earnings are possible here. I even teach them also how to trade and do just like what I am doing right now which is posting. I am glad to say that from the people around me 4 of them are already here in the crypto world because of me.

Even if a day the price goes down to 1 buck you will still see me here and I will still use Bitcoin. I refer to Bitcoin because I'm not interested in altcoins (except maybe 1 or 2 privacy-centric cryptocurrencies), I think I can say I'm an altcoin racist, but the problem is the same with any cryptocurrency btw. I've probably already said it earlier, but I'd like to see the price going down to $1 a day, they will leave and we'll see the real users, the ones who continue to use it because they have a real use for it (other than trading/investing I mean).

I'm at 2 fingers to tell you Bitcoin was better before but I admit it's exaggerating. After all the ecosystem is bigger, more development, etc. But the mentality changed a lot for sure and maybe this is exactly my problem finally.

What bothers me is the regulations and they create it because people started to use it as investments, helped with the stupid ICOs, shitcoins ect so they, the govt., treat is like any other investment (capital gains tax,...) Isn't it funny to see governments refusing to consider Bitcoin as a currency but when it's time to tax it and collect money they have no problem, they just invent some new categories like crypto-assets, etc.

In results we see KYC here, KYC there, KYC everywhere, of course, it doesn't stop me to send money to a friend without to rely on a 3rd party but it also restricts me to use some things. Stupid AML directives with the fake excuse of illegal activities etc. If one day we will be able to buy our bread at the baker's and pay for it with bitcoins, we will have to provide our identity card if this continues. KYC!

Consumers and merchants, no need to rush and to be worried ok, but 10 years already and beside some e-commerces, not much. What I want is to be able to pay the supermarket with bitcoins, to pay the electricity, the water, the butcher, the baker...

That whole vision seems unrealistic, and like some pie in the sky attempt to suggest that your perception of use case(s) is superior than other people.  It is like failing/refusing to accept the world for what it is and trying to prescribe some kind of a pure moral reason for bitcoin.  That is not the way of the world.

 

Maybe you have troubles accepting the world?

yeah, I have certain people that I don't want to hang around, but I am not despising their existence.  As bitcoin grows, there are likely going to be all kinds of reasons and use cases built on top of it that is not even morally acceptable to either of us, but there is a certain inability to dictate the use of bitcoin or the community of bitcoin because the cat is out of the bag, and people can largely do whatever they like with it.. to the extent that they can get it to work for their particular situation/need.



Governments are still trying to wrap their ideas around what to do with it exactly, and there is some anticipation in the design of bitcoin for these kinds of matters, whether considered as an attack upon bitcoin or otherwise, there are incentive systems in bitcoin, and governments may be forced into a kind of role to build its systems around bitcoin when they try various techniques that are having difficulties harnessing the power of bitcoin.



Sure, many bitcoiners share your concerns, and sure, there are development that try to figure out ways to have a variety of options, but ultimately, I agree with you that KYC seems to be becoming more widespread, and whether if that kind of KYC/AML is going to meaningfully damper bitcoins growth is to be seen, but it does seem like a kind of natural reaction for governments to try to figure out whatever tools that they can to try to keep bitcoin in some kind of check.. successful or NOT is still to be seen.. seems like it is going to be an ongoing dance, or maybe wacamole so there are likely going to be advantages to some kinds of options within... having a variety of tools and attempting to know about them... Of course, a lot of people would like to have really small transactions to be exempt from accounting, and I believe lightning is built to attempt to accomplish that, and if the government has trouble controlling lightning  they might NOT be able to get people to comply with reporting super small transactions because they are almost meaningless anyhow, and no one wants to have to report how they paid for their coffee and smaller transactions like that, if those kinds of transactions become more feasible and widespread on lightning and or other 2nd/3rd layer systems.



I think that there are some options to attempt to pay with bitcoin, but not too many want to pay with bitcoin these days.  If the price goes up more then they might want to pay during a bubble, and with time, I would think that more merchants might want to get bitcoin or get involved in bitcoin but sure, we are not necessarily there at the moment.   Many of us likely noticed too that when we are in a bitcoin hype-period, people get really crazy in their desire to get bitcoin... Of course, so far it is not lasting, but it is NOT totally fleeting either, because there might be some desires for some to get bitcoin that is greater than the desire for some current HODLers to spend it.. but if the price goes shooting up, then more HODLers will be inspired to shave off some of their holdings, and maybe even to shave off all of their BTC holdings.

I appreciate the dialectic here.  This thread waxes Socratic.  LeGaulois, JayJuanGee, I think you both have pieces of the truth that should be synthesized together.

You know that I am a Bitcoin idealist, deadset against KYC, with a general scorn for mere speculation.  What LeGaulois is saying, must be said!  Most of the few who are even capable of thinking on that level, are too timid to actually think through these points—let alone speak about them.  After all, you don’t want to be smeared as “evil” (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5214200.0) with all insinuations of the Four Horsemen of the Cryptopalypse.  Sacrebleu.  And to criticize empty speculation?  Simple greed will deter most people from thinking that through with any wisdom whatsoever.

However:


I have learned by hard personal experience, self-defeating principles are ipso facto wrong principles.  The aphorism that “all that is necessary for evil to win is for the good to do nothing” is oft deadly incorrect in practice:  Those who are “good” in their minds let loose all the ills of the world, when their own “good” principles stop “good” from winning.  If you do that that to yourself, then by the inexorable law of cause and effect, you are in substance fighting for your declared enemies!

In particular, principles which deny reality are never noble.  The world cannot simply be wished into being a better place.

It is necessary to be pragmatic in service of higher principles.  I do not posit that “the ends justify the means”, insofar as means which contradict their purported ends do turn you into what you purport to oppose.  However, at least minimally acceptable means that do not outright contradict the ends can be the key to success, i.e., to not giving victory as a gift to all you claim you despise.

By its nature as a thing born to move the world, Bitcoin unavoidably has before it a long struggle against a world that does not want to be moved.  And...


For my part, I do not passively “have trouble” accepting the world:  I actively reject the world as it is.  That is why I seek to change it for the better—by means that will actually work.

The answer is LeGaulois’ idealism plus JayJuanGee’s realism.  The former guides the latter’s high-level design goals, and the latter guides the former’s low-level implementation.

Now, how can that be done in practice?  What practical, positive actions can be done to grow the “everybody’s agreement” of the Bitcoin social phenomenon, while not only avoiding, but actively resisting unacceptable compromise of Bitcoin principles?

---

Edited to add, because this is the Internet:  I know that for the sake of rhetorical clarity, I have perforce simplified both the “idealistic” and “realistic” positions to make my point.  Obviously, if JayJuanGee (replete with his Bitcoin maximalist signature) were not a Bitcoin idealist, or if LeGaulois were not a realistic thinker, then we would not be having this discussion at all.

I personally am NOT really trying to do anything to change bitcoin.  Sure I talk about it a lot and I participate in these various forum threads and tell other people about it from time to time in real life, but overall I attempt to take a descriptive rather than prescriptive approach to bitcoin.  I also found a way to participate in, invest in and learn about it over the last 6 years of my involvement.

 Sure there are a variety of people finding different roles in bitcoin, and still to discover bitcoin.  Surely, we are a bunch of nerds relative to the whole population that have not even entered into understanding bitcoin yet.... yeah, maybe they heard the word, "bitcoin", but they have little to no clue about it and have not taken any mindshare or financial share into it.

 Even though LeGaulois denies being any kind of alt coin supporter or bitcoin naysayer in that regard, I do frequently perceive those who are complaining that bitcoin is not used enough or is being used in the wrong ways to be influenced by the multitude of negative talking-points that come out of various altcoin camps, suggesting that bitcoin is deficient in various ways, but surely their true agenda is to pump their coins in various ways in order to fill in for bitcoin's various deficiencies.  LeGaulois denies being part of that particular group, so I don't mind taking him at his word in that regard.

In the end, I don't really know any answers to your questions nullius because ultimately a variety of people are going to find a variety of use cases for bitcoin and develop upon it over the years from their own perspective whether enlightened or dumb or base, and each of us will choose the extent to which we find value in participating in bitcoin, whether that is for present or future use cases or just speculation on those... and we balance our investment (psychological and financial) into bitcoin according to those perceptions.. which also of course, pertains to our own particulars, too... such as cashflow, investment into other assets, view of bitcoin as compared with other assets, timeline, risk tolerance, and our skills and time available to manage or learn about our investment.

I can see why it's best to prepare for all contingencies, but I've yet to hear any governments proposing ID checks for everyday physical fiat cash payments (tobacco/alcohol/etc aside) and would expect fierce resistance from the general public if they ever did.  So it would be a rather impressive double standard to apply an ID requirement to bitcoin payments in such a fashion.  Naturally, the only sensible course of action open to us would be to resist if they did try to do it.  Even if principles weren't a factor, it would be far too intrusive and bothersome to be worthwhile implementing.  I don't think retailers would be supportive of it either, because it would be a lot of extra effort on their part.

Out of interest, where are people currently seeing all this KYC?  I've only noticed it on exchanges and I rarely use those nowadays.  Is it really "everywhere"?  Or was that more of an embellishment to make us consider the slippery slope argument?

i also have lived with no bank account for a few years (finical irresponsibility on my part 100%). and it does suck indeed. so much you have no access to, and things like having to race to the bank on which the check was drawn before it closes (hourly bank hours designed so working stiffs have a hard time accessing it unless taking time out of the work day specifically for that, hard to do depending on the jobsite and if someone can cover you) to turn into cash on as you have to go to that bank that it was drawn on.. and if you didnt make it in time while they were open... raman noodles? i wish. i might not even have gas to get home to eat that..

i could go on and on to argue that a bank account is practically 100% needed to operate in this world (my part anyway). and of course its a GREAT tool to keep people in debt. it sure held me down pretty well, but thats on me.

interestingly enough, it was bitcoin that taught me about sound money, central banks etc. of course i have bank accounts now and all the stuff associated with it. no real choice here. but i also have bitcoin now. gamechanger.

i suppose in some ways you need to be poor and unbanked to understand and i have been. being poor, on a scale of 1-10,  is maybe a 3. educational, but not fun. prefer not to be there again.

I don't necessarily know of all of the KYC instances, but there is a term called "shotgun KYC" in which exchanges all of a sudden will require some level of KYC for all customers who had not previously been KYC'd in order to withdraw or even to continue to use the exchange.  Has caused a lot of resentment in various circles of BTCtalk (also required on shitcoin exchanges)

Most people nowadays think of bitcoin as a get rich scheme. Which is definitely not true and much more, a toxic way to describe bitcoin. So we shouldn't capitalize on bitcoin's profitability when we are recommending its usage to people who are interested on it. They might get disappointed and in the end pull out their investments which will hurt bitcoin. Instead, focus on the benefits that bitcoin has like portability and lower transaction fees

Bitcoin is not just an investment tool that opens the door to wealth. Bitcoin is a new technology. A new economic model needs to be created. Blockchain offers a very important system. Bitcoin advertised this. A new transfer network may spread.

The presence of Bitcoin as cryptocurrency has indeed become a real social phenomenon. Without us knowing, Bitcoin has almost been adopted by many people of the world. Even now, many people want to have Bitcoin because of its good value.

That is the annoying part of most of the exchanges, in order for you to deposit or withdraw more; you need to pass the requirements in the specific level of KYC. Most of the exchanges have level 4 where you can have unlimited withdrawal and deposits in your funds. But for me it is a threat to my identity and I really against in KYC. Our identity should be protected and that is why I do not like KYC.

My hope is, the more exchanges who introduce prohibitive KYC, the sooner the incentive arises for people simply stop using them and find ways to simplify and encourage the use of peer-to-peer trading.

The adage always goes that "necessity is the mother of invention" and this is clearly something we need.  Exchanges are a throwback to legacy finance.  Something we reverted to out of habit.  Except it's a bad habit that we need to break.  We're supposed to be disrupting middlemen, not creating them.  In the grand scheme of things, I don't see exchanges as a significant part of Bitcoin's future.  I have a suspicion they're going to force themselves out of the equation by becoming too cumbersome to actually use.  Architects of their own demise.  The moment peer-to-peer trading becomes the easier option, the average user will simply avoid exchanges and it'll solely the most dedicated full-time speculators that will still use those platforms.

From the topic, I think the social media has more role to play in addition to what they have done already. The social media has a way to put out message that can catch the interest of populace and I think this is important. If bitcoin is having a good representation in the media, no doubt we are going to be above the adoption rate we are now.

By saying the KYC, I wanted to generalize. And nope, it's not just about the exchange platforms asking you to give your ID card, etc
AML, banks restrictions (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs.twimg.com%2Fmedia%2FENSEww_WwAIVSkl%3Fformat%3Dpng%26name%3D900x900&t=609&c=h7axD_nhS6uheg), big data, proof of funds, laws created to either limit you or something else... When I first started using Bitcoin, around the MtGox collapse, if we would have been asked for a KYC verification and had to give our ID, we would have laughed very hard.
Illegal activities using cryptocurrencies, this excuse is fake like Santa Claus is.

By the way, speculating and investing isn't really the same thing (https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2013/02/27/what-is-the-difference-between-investing-and-speculation-2/)


The philosophical question: is the finance industry at the service of society?

I believe in order to see Bitcoin adopted massively the population needs to change its mindset about money, how we use it and how the finance works nowadays. Because there are fundamental dysfunctions in with consequences economic, social and societal. If we reproduce the same errors then we will just duplicate the same problems, another disguise but the same shit, instead of to be with fiats it will be with crypto.
 
Or maybe Bitcoin will be the 'tool' that will make the population changing, in case of a monetary reset or something like that.

By accepting to be regulated, it's already the beginning of the reproduction of the same errors. I would like to remind you how many times we have read here "Sir, regulations will help the mass adoption and institutional money"
Institutional money, oh man we don't need that, we don't need regulations, Bitcoin has been doing well without.

Just because regulation exists, that does not mean that people are advocating for it.

Of course, there are various forum of bitcoin and practices that are cumbersome and anti-thetical to bitcoin. but there is so much that any of us can do about systems that are built and the willingness of people to use them. 

Just take, for example, people getting into bitcoin and keeping their coins on exchanges, how are you going to stop that?  There needs to be other options in order to incentivize people to use the other options.. Also, remember local bitcoins?  Hard to use local bitcoins anymore, so are other direct systems developing?  Maybe ones that are NOT as good, but there are some developing and likely to continue to develop.

You can assert that speculation and investing are NOT the same until you are blue in the face, but the fact of the matter comes down to actual practices, thinking of people and ways in which people might get into bitcoin rather than getting stuck on definitional assertions that don't mean much of anything, except some academic or theoretical claim regarding how a word should properly be used - which means diddly squat to me.

In the end, bitcoin gives you an option that you can choose or choose NOT to involve yourself into it, and you can choose whether you want to use it or hold it and if so, how you want to accomplish those.  Decisions regarding involvement in bitcoin are going to vary, and sure there still remains some technical difficulties too, and maybe if the lady in the small village hears that she can buy $10 of bitcoin per week and store it on her phone in her lightning wallet, it will keep value better than her local currency, and she should be able to use it one year later or several weeks later, she might be willing to buy a bit of it to have, just in case it might come useful to her in the future.  Of course, user-friendliness is helpful and also possibly having a friend who has already done it can show her how to do it, too.  That can be considered using it, but it could also be considered storing it for future use, and choices like that are going to vary - and might also depend upon what kinds of other value storage and/or transactional options are available to her.

One of the reasons may be because Bitcoin was created at the right time. I mean Satoshi created the Bitcoin once Fiat (dollars) was in decreased performance. So, people understand that Bitcoin has something to improve that situation and present hope for a better future word financial.

Indeed. Bitcoin trend around the world was happening naturally and massively. It is something rarely happens and surprisingly even many governments refuse it but in fact, more people are interested in using Bitcoin. I know some have the intention to be rich but others may think to support a new revolution in world financial or economy. However, finally, all join together even if having different purposes.

I think that bitcoin is extraordinary, because many countries don't support bitcoin and there are some countries that prohibit circulation
bitcoin. Doesn't make bitcoin weak. What exists today after a decade is getting stronger and more popular. It's not apart from the role of
social media which is very massive. Especially youtube, tweeter and facebook make bitcoin very phenomenal. Moreover people who are
tired of fiat inflation increases, making bitcoin increasingly in demand.

But why wasn't anything built on top of Bitcoin? I believe it was because the Core developers wanted the blockchain to be as "basic" as possible, and because accommodating them required hard forks. Wasn't that the reason why Vitalik founded Ethereum? Because he can't build the things he wanted on top of Bitcoin?

Maybe I can’t express myself with clever words, using professional terms and phrases, but I can say with the words of a simple layman who can understand a little how beneficial Bitcoin is for humanity.  I am one of those people who negatively regard the poor professionalism of governments and the manipulations of all officials during the leadership of their countries.  First of all, I pay attention to the economic decline and inflation, which affects a simple person.  I believe that creating a deficit in the state budget, the government will put into circulation too much money that is not confirmed by gold reserves.  In this case, Bitcoin would be much more profitable for people, because of its limited amount.  Perhaps because of this, the US is opposed to bitcoin.

I am not necessarily talking about short term building or even on-chain building.  If the systems are good, then down the road they will somehow be pegged to bitcoin. Right now those very systems are extremely experimental, and it is way more important to get bitcoin's sound money and security correct, first before getting distracted into too many side projects.

I don't have any problem with those various systems getting built and even various experiments in that direction, but it would seem to be too much and too fast to be build a bunch of crazy-ass stuff on bitcoin, when we still only have 1% world adoption and there is plenty use case in the mere sound money challenges and the potential battles that are going to come from that very innovative and never been tried before use cases.

In other words, there has never been any sound money that even approaches bitcoin's, and so it will be quite important and innovative if bitcoin were to be successful in that direction... .. needs a bit of a long view... but no problem if some system like defi shows promise and then gets pegged to bitcoin, but likely more on a second, third or fourth layer rather than potentially introducing bugs into the central sound money mission, which seems to be way more important.

Also, you are not really going to get meaningful defi if you have centralization issues or some dumb bug wipes out a bunch of value, so it seems way more important to get the sound money and security to be quite solidly established.  And, we will see with the passage of time, if bitcoin continues with the sound money vision and some of those defi systems end up gravitating to pegging to bitcoin because of bitcoin's security and soundness.

“Basic” sounds to me like you’re saying “base layer”.  So, yes:  The Bitcoin blockchain is a rock-solid base layer that does one thing excellently:  Global, decentralized BFT transaction ordering, resulting in a single global ledger with a unit of account that provides the sound-money properties which JayJuanGee described.  (It also does some other things less-excellently; but I don’t really care about that, and it is irrelevant to the point I am addressing.)  Thereupon, we have a single global, public reference from which to synchronize private off-chain ledgers such as Lightning channels.


Hard forks are a risk, and also raise the question of just who has the authority to call for one.  I want to be conservative with risks in the base-layer handling of my money; and although I do hope that ongoing hardfork research can work out a good way to do a hardfork in a decetnralized system, the problem is so great (including its centralization risk) that I am automatically suspicious of anybody who even suggests a hardfork.

Segwit was a stroke of genius, because it added features necessary for Lightning (plus fixed some bugs) with only a softfork.  From there, I think it’s clear, the solution for most needs is to build on top of the blockchain layer, not to add to it.


Because he couldn’t do the fantastically stupid high-risk project of bolting a Turing-complete VM onto Bitcoin?  I guess so.

Imagine if the Ethereum DAO (to give only one example) had happened with Bitcoin.  Horresco referens.

I am currently entrusting the majority of my life savings to Bitcoin—yes, almost all my liquid wealth (excepting some small fiat cash reserve—as small as I can keep it).  I would not risk that on Ethereum, just on a technical level of asking myself, “What if this piece of oh so innovative technology loses all my money?”  The prudence of putting money I cannot afford to lose into Bitcoin is financially questionable.  However, I do think it is absolutely prudent to take that technical risk on the reliability of Bitcoin Core and the Bitcoin consensus rules.

For context, I asked, and said those things because JayJuanGee said,


Then it becomes a catch-22 in my opinion. How can those systems that want to be better, can be built upon Bitcoin?

It's possible that we had been misunderstanding one another.  I personally believe that a lot of things are going to gravitate into bitcoin, and they are not necessarily going to be built on bitcoin right away, but frequently, there are people who say that they are working on a lot of projects that are on various shitcoins, including the amorphous defi concept, but their purpose is likely NOT so much about building upon a secure system, but instead engaging in some kind of means to print money or to pump and dump and they do not care if their system is secure. 

Sure, everyone needs to put food on their table, so I cannot really blame people for wanting to make money through whatever work they are doing, but I, personally, see a lot of seeming phoney baloney in the various systems that are built on ethereum, for example, because the whole ethereum project comes off as a big ass smoke and mirrors and confusion regarding what it is exactly, especially when it tries to imply that it is as good as bitcoin in terms of sound money and security, which is just baloney deception, so I have a lot of difficulty taking serious the various financial projects that are built upon such seemingly insecure coins like ethereum, but hey, even satoshi had recognized that there were going to likely be a lot of snake oil imitation products along the course of bitcoin's growth, yet in the long run the value of a lot of products are likely going to be hinged on bitcoin especially if they happen to have some redeeming features that can be tethered or federated into bitcoin (even if it might  be on a second layer or something like that), and maybe even if there has been a lot of years of development and experiments on those projects (whether defi or otherwise) on other blockchains that are not very secure, compared with bitcoin  (of course, bitcoin's security and its sound money are like a conglomeration of intertwined incentives packages that cause individuals to build upon it and to invest into it, even if it takes a long time to play out and to figure out).

I would call bitcoin a financial phenomenon that can still change the system, but it needs more time.

I don't know if it will really be "a lot of things".  There might be a few innovations we can incorporate, but there's so much gimmickry in the market right now that it almost seems to drown out anything that might actually be revolutionary.  Quite a few people talk about altcoins in terms of faster/cheaper transactions, but I think their greatest purpose is to field-test all the weird and wonderful ideas people come up with and hopefully screen-out the failed ones.  Then, on the rare occasion one of those features is a net positive and provides some additional utility that people actually benefit from, it's something we can potentially look at building on top of Bitcoin.  Assuming it doesn't compromise any of the existing qualities people like, that is.  So generally, I'd expect some new features built on top, but not that many.  Then again, who knows what the future holds?  I could be way off, heh.

It's already changed the system.



Sure, bitcoin is a changing the system in progress - like the gradually and then suddenly kind of phenomenon in which it remains quite likely difficult as fuck to actually recognize or appreciate any kind of change that bitcoin has actually caused or contributed towards causing, except amongst a circle of computer nerds, like the demographic of the earlier stages of adopters, so yeah it could take years and years and years for regular people to take a stake in bitcoin or to find some kind of use case in which they actually believe that there is value, beyond speculation.  Nonetheless, adoption and use cases and even ease of use continues to expand, expand and expand, and pretty soon the neighbor finds out that he can process his gym membership and related activities through bitcoin's lightning network and get half off or some silly thing like that, and pretty soon he says what the fuck, and buys .05BTC so that he can have that available for his gym membership and even use that amount for a few years without even worrying about payment processing and various kinds of matters like that because each time he goes to the gym or participates in an otherwise related activity (a marathon or a MMA attendance or a concert or a movie, or when he eats at certain select restaurants that are in that system), he just scans payment from his phone and does not even think about it further.

So, yeah, it could take 10 years or even more for those various kinds of systems to develop or to be built upon bitcoin (or to be tethered or federated to bitcoin) but likely they are going to come with the passage of time and the multitude of developments, including lightning network, liquid and other affiliated bitcoin systems.



Why does it matter?  If there are systems that end up having value, then a way will be found.  It's a variation of the old saying, build a better mouse trap and they will come.  For sure, bitcoin is the best mouse trap, but not too many people realize that, yet... no need to rush.. the gravitation is likely to continue to happen because there is a system of decentralized computers all over the world that continue to back up bitcoin and no one has control over it... so even if there are a bunch of people who use a system (let's say defi) and they only put $2-$5 on such system, and if there start to become 10s of millions of people using such system, it becomes a kind of honeypot, and who the fuck is going to want to keep such value on ethereum or tethered to ethereum when they cannot even figure out what ethereum is.. It surely is not secure and it sure is a bunch of gobbledy-gook smoke and mirrors... Yeah, sure, now millions of snot-nosed 14 years olds might be willing to put their $2-$5 into various ethereum systems, but in the end, there remains a need for the kind of decentralized immutable security that bitcoin really offers rather than some bullshit imitation system that really does not have what it proclaims to have - which is the securing of the underlying value from various kinds of base-level chicanery, whether the mishaps are intentional or unintentional..


I am not negating the value of that.  It is just not sound money, but there surely remains value to having a variety of experiments as long as you recognize that they are not the real thing.  Personally, my main problems come from when they are making proclamations that they are the future blah blah blah and denigrating bitcoin along the way in order to pump their bullshit and using those projects as money printing machines... but sure, I don't have any problems with the facts that those systems are being worked on and attempting to be pushed out to the public in various kinds of attempting to find use cases ways.


You are not going to get any argument from me regarding your various points here...   We might not even really recognize some of the possible use cases that end up coming out of such experiments, and sure, it is possible that they might be built on other platforms for 20-30 years before they gravitate into bitcoin, and likely at that time several of us might be dead and we cannot even say whether we were correct or not.  We do not necessarily need to be correct in order to decide our own level and kind of participation that each of us chooses for today.  We might invest our time, psychology and money based on a 1-10 year timeline, and even if we are 5 years into our investment, we can choose to change our various investments based on our own circumstances, including changes in our views that might be (likely to be) somewhat different down the road. 

Bitcoin is a bit different for me now, as compared to 6 years ago, even if I have largely stayed invested financially, my understanding and my comfort has changed, and I have complete discretion whether I change my strategy or largely stick with a strategy that I had incrementally tweaked along the way in the last 6 years.  For me, it has not been "all or nothing" but some people prefer to think of bitcoin in that kind of way, and that may or may not work out too well for them.  I personally, don't feel hardly any need to hedge some of my bet into various shitcoin projects, but I am not going to totally denigrate someone else who does hedge into various side projects and tries to build those aspects of the ecosystem unless their practice is to denigrate/negate bitcoin while they are doing it and/or try to act like their project is a kind of bitcoin 2.0 or engage what I believe to be misrepresentations, when instead it might merely be some kind of interesting side-project in which it is o.k. to have a variety of people working on those kinds of side-projects (not like you can stop people from doing what they are going to do or that it is even desirable to attempt to stop them from working on what they do or even having various kinds of seemingly pie in the sky detached from reality visions regarding the speculative importance of their project(s)).

Sorry for the late reply,  It wasn't showing in my feed.
And thanks for the quality discussion, it feels good and it's rare in this board :D



What? People begged for it. You just have to see literally the thousands of posts saying "we need it to attract big investors or for this and that". I'm seeing it over and over the past 2-3 years here. I know that I have to look outside this forum too, but since they like to repeat what is said by media outlets it gives a good sample.
Anyway, I do it and what I see is, how many press articles have we read saying that regulations were necessary, inevitable and indispensable, the only way to see the mass adoption.
Contrary to what you think I see a lot of people preaching for regulations. Whether it's here or in the Bitcoin community in general.

I understand we have different uses of Bitcoin but It hasn't been 'designed' for what people are using it (in the majority). And surely not a quick rich scheme.


Lowering the risk to get your coins hacked or locked by the platform itself, isn't it enough incentivizing?

I repeat myself but the majority of the transactions are related to trading, not real uses cases. So from a decentralized currency, it's rather online. investment, a new asset class. Bitcoin's ideology is gone for a lot of people, and capitalism is infesting the crypto world lol.

Some people begged for BIG BLOCKs too, but did not mean that they were representative.

You can find all kinds of people saying all kinds of shit, and that does not mean that they are representative.



Fair enough.  Yes, sometimes people say all kinds of shit, about what is needed, or what would be best for bitcoin, and sometimes you will even catch yours truly engaging in various expressions about what he wishes.... but so what?  You think honey badger cares?

O.k.  Yes, I have seen both sides regarding "we need an ETF," but still who cares?  Just because a bunch of people are saying it?



O.k.  maybe I will give up on this argument regarding whether people are advocating for x, y or z.... and change my argument to "who cares?"

or I could change my argument to ... "uncle... I concede that people say a bunch of shit"



O..k. Let's say that I concede regarding the facts that a lot of people are saying that they want some safety BIG players to come in and pump bitcoin to the moon.. such as custody solutions etc etc...

You are wanting to assert that people also want KYC and AML and all of that too?   

I just see that you are trying to get too much out of this.  Bitcoin is designed in a certain way that it can still grow whether the BIG players embrace it or not.


Bitcoin is also designed in such a way that sooner or later BIG players are likely going to have to come into bitcoin in order to be relevant.  BIG players need bitcoin, bitcoin does not need BIG players, even though there is likely going to be measurable benefits to having orange coin go up, in the form of various pumps.  Hard to complain about orange number going up, even if it is NOT exactly a necessity for orange coin to survive and even prosper.  So again, maybe you are arguing about dynamics that likely happen through the progression of the various network effects and a kind of inevitability of greater and greater regulation, but there is disruption effects with bitcoin too because it is a paradigm shifting technology that we have never had before, so we cannot be sure exactly how it is all going to play out.  We have a little development and regulation here or there that might be facilitating bitcoin or hostile to bitcoin but it still seems quite difficult to kill bitcoin completely because it is like a multi-headed monster across jurisdictions, so even if some jurisdictions might want to control and contain bitcoin, the ones who are smart enough about it, recognize that attempting to control it is quite difficult, and that they can only do so much in the so difficult to win, so why not join them instead of fighting them.



Still it is a BIG so what.  Mass adoption is not going to be rushed anyhow.  Sure you hear some people saying that "we need mass adoption," but do we really need it?  I will assert mass adoption is going to come, so what is the real purpose of calling for it or saying that "we need it?"

What do we have now?  Something like 1% of world-wide adoption, at best?   The various bitcoin systems continue to get built and more people find more use cases for bitcoin. 

Yeah, there are some people who have accumulated way more coins than what they need on a personal level, and maybe that will work out for them, but if we run out of coins, we just move down to a smaller unit, and if we need more than 8 digits, then we can even expand beyond the 8 digits, which apparently has already been shown to be feasible on lightning network.

I am just having trouble seeing your arguments, and even if smart people are saying that we need x, y or z in order to achieve a, b or c, that does not even mean that they are right.... if we are relying on mere expressions of public opinion regarding what is needed.



Likely the phenomenon of people preaching, begging or asking for regulations is mixed, and a BIG so what?  Sure, what people ask for might be one kind of indicator regarding what is going on in bitcoin, but I doubt that it is a central indicator.  Probably more important indicator is what people are doing with bitcoin and what it is capable of doing and even money momentum and waves in the BTC price that show whether or not some of the price prediction models are correct, such as stock to flow, 4 year fractal, s-curve exponential adoption based on metcalfe's law and networking effect, etc. 
So the existence of regulation and the asking for regulations is just one piece of the puzzle.






Maybe we can even disagree what bitcoin was designed for, and it does not really matter too much what we think or what it was designed for.  We already have a whole lot of use cases that are likely going to vary based on location but also these use cases remain evolving concepts too, and it seems that I have already gone over this fairly thoroughly.

If you are trying to suggest that bitcoin is dominated by speculation or that bitcoin can be contained into predetermined categories, which seems to be partly where you are headed with these kinds of arguments, I remain unpersuaded by attempts to pigeon hole bitcoin in prescription kinds of ways or even to suggest that it ONLY has so much value because this is what the majority of what people want as indicated by this poll and that poll... Again, who cares what people say that they want, and one of the barometers of people valuing bitcoin continues to be its price movement.  Price movement shows that people want it and also shows that manipulators can only manipulate it so much before sometimes bitcoin's price will explode out of their control.

Consider bitcoin's price in early 2016.. there were a whole hell of a lot of attempts to keep bitcoin under $500, and bitcoin's prices had been manipulated the fuck out of during 2014 and 2015 and even through 2016.  At a certain point, the manipulators could not get the BTC price to go down any more or to stay below $500, so there was no real choice to go along to get along and to go with the momentum of BTC's then price, which was UP.

Development continued through that time.. and a variety of use cases were found, but likely a lot of the UP and DOWN between late 2015 and early 2017 and even proceeding into todays price had been pushed by speculation.  At the same time, manipulators would like all fuck to get BTC prices to go below $3k and to stay there for a while, but in late 2018 they could not get BTC prices to go below $3k, and there has been some troubles after April 1, 2019 to try to get BTC prices to go back down to $3k.. and in some sense $3k might be a lost cause, and we get a kind of Lindy effect that becomes prices way above $3k... and even now there are fuck all difficulties of getting BTC prices to get into the $6ks and preferably below $6k, but she just won't go down. 

Call that speculation domination, or speculation coupled by use cases coupled by development and adoption coupled by financialization or coupled by regulatory attempts to stifle various bitcoin uses cases or whatever you want to call it, the bitcoin space is way more complicated than attempts to narrowly describe what some people might wish upon it, including you and me.... and including governments and financial institutions, too.  Yeah, there are likely going to continue to be attempts to control and regulate bitcoin, but how far are these attempts going to go?  How successful are they going to be?  What is going to be your own chosen investment levels?  If you are too much of a naysayer or too much of a FUD dud believing that the governments are going to regulate bitcoin into a lack of disruptiveness, then good luck to you, because whether governments regulate bitcoin or not, it still remains as a force to be reckoned with and it already has been disruptive and seems to continue to have enough design power to continue to serve as a very decently-sized ongoing disruptor of various status quo systems, government, financial and other personal value holding/transfer options.



Didn't coinbase just come out with a report that they have nearly 1 million bitcoins in their possession?  Seems to me that people are putting their bitcoins with 3rd parties such as exchanges.  Maybe not everyone , but a decent number of people are leaving their coins on exchanges and with other 3rd parties.



You just seem to be drawing all kinds of weird conclusions in an effort to attempt to minimize the disruptive importance of bitcoin.  For what reason(s), I don't know, and I don't really care too much.  I mean bitcoin is what it is, and if you neither see bitcoin as important or even disruptive or valuable, then that is your choice. 

If you believe that bitcoin is overvalued and overspeculated upon in a way that is NOT sustainable then that is your choice, too.

There is all kinds of evidence out there in order that varying individuals such as you and me can arrive at our own conclusions regarding the extent that we consider something like bitcoin to be valuable or if we see value in its future direction or even as an investment vehicle for ourselves.  There is also sometimes information or evidence that seems to be contradictory and difficult to resolve, but there seems to be a lot of good information out there too, and even these days, bitcoin seems to be a much more solid investment than it was 6 years ago when I got started, but there are also some strange factors and indicators that can cause you to arrive at any conclusion that you want. 

For example, do you believe it or not? In the past year, there were about 12 million bitcoins that did not move at all.  What does that mean to you?  To me, it seems to show that there is a decent amount of HODLing that is going on, but sure, there also might be a decent number of those coins that are held by exchanges, so they do NOT need to move those coins in order to facilitate trades on their platform.  Also, seems to me that we cannot just move to a system of decentralized exchanges and people retaining their private keys because some of those decentralized exchanges are still being developed, built and tested, and NONE of those decentralized exchanges have truly gotten masses of HODLers to use those exchanges, rather than leaving their coins with 3rd party exchanges. 

Yes, a lot of this is likely to be tested out in the years to come, and surely if we have some exchange crises in which people demand their coins, then we could see a crisis.  What if coinbase only has 300k coins, but there are claims to a million coins?  Will coinbase go under in the event that they cannot cover all of their claims?  Some of these matters are still to play out, and on a personal level, each of us decides our own level of allocation based on these kinds of factors and also including our own personal factors, too..,. including our views on bitcoin as compared to other investment asset options, to the extent that we have any meaningful amount of money that we can afford to invest anyhow.  We also likely realize the statistic that about 50% of average americans do not have enough value available to cover an emergency $400 expense, so we have a lot of americans who live on the edge in regard to their personal finances, and I am not sure if that means that hardly any americans are investing towards the future, or if all of their investible assets are in home ownership.  In any event, sometimes what other people do or are able to do can affect our investment decisions and whether we consider bitcoin to be a good investment on its own or a hedge to balance out other investments that we might have in our total portfolio.

My thanks to taikuri13 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1855828) for the Russian translation of “Bitcoin: The Social Phenomenon” (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5221379.0).  It is an important message for all peoples and all languages, because:


OP has been edited to add a Translations section.  (Pre-edit archival snapshot (https://web.archive.org/web/20200128153427/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215927.0).)

The Bitcoin Social Phenomenon now comes to us from Romania as “Bitcoin: Fenomenul social (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5223315.0)”.  Mulțumesc, GazetaBitcoin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1285797)!

For I repeat:

I am glad I was involved in this wonderful piece of art, by translating it in Romanian.
Welcome and thank you as well, nullius!

Există un singur Bitcoin!

A social phenomenon that I don't think has been fully studied yet. But on the other hand, the appearance of bitcoin is very important not only for the financial but also for the social sphere.

Thanks for sharing this. I like and agree to the perspective that you cannot stop people from attempting to go their own way and try to get a shot at glory with their own projects and that the problems arise when lot of these people try to paint bitcoin's future by taking analogies from other technologies.

To entice newbies as well as the marketing types, it is very easy to say things like "Bitcoin is like Vacuum tubes used in old radio system. The muliti-chain, multi-token, Federated voting, Distributed PoS bullshit we are working on is the Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor you need.". The understanding that bitcoin is technologically the best at what it does and that it is impossible and fraudulent to replicate/ replace the network effect comes too late or never does.

We do need a bit of exposition on this idea that bitcoin is in itself the technology that will evolve. Bitcoin is not Yahoomail that will be taken over by Gmail. It is not DEC that will lose the computer business to IBM. For an analogy, Bitcoin is more like internet itself for which Yahoo and Gmail are the same thing. Its like semiconductor manufacturing for which Vacuum thyristor and IGBT are the same thing.

Teşekkürler, mindrust (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=176777)!  Bitcoin: Bir Sosyal Fenomen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5227042.0) is now sung in the Turkish language; for:

But there are a lot of times that it is getting destroyed.

A lot of hacking and scams, talking about scams, I just watched a video about Onecoin and this Dr. Ruja behind it that is said that will take Bitcoin down. Just imagine the damage they did with the people that might invest in cryptocurrencies and the ones that already invested in it and said to lose 250K euro.

Someone can easily be scammed for the physical cash in their pocket.  That doesn't necessarily mean they'll never use physical cash again.  Hopefully all it will do is make them more aware of the potential pitfalls and be perhaps be a little more cautious in future about what it is they're actually getting themselves into.

But yes.  It's possible some of the victims of those major scams will take the stance that they should never get involved with crypto again, which would indeed be a shame, but it's not something we have any power to remedy.  The only thing we can do is make it abundantly clear that Bitcoin itself is not a scam.  However, it is a highly valued and sought after thing, so as such, precautions absolutely need to be taken to protect it. 

Hvala, Rikafip (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2658890)!  Croatia now tells the world of Bitcoin: Društveni Fenomen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5228063.0); for...


(Thanks also to Pmalek (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=112493) for Projekat Anastazija: Bitcoineri Protiv Krađe Identiteta (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5228132.0).)

Hello @nullius,

here is the translation of your great topic in Italian - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5236497.0

Best regards

Yep, what people loves about Bitcoin is the freedom it gives. If there is no freedom in making use of Bitcoin most of the people here might not be interested in it. Imagine that Bitcoin is an asset that can be controlled by the government at anytime , there wouldn't be any need for it.

But, the fact that it cannot be controlled by anyone except the level of demand and supply gives a lot of people hope in it. And sure I know that there are lots of people who are against Bitcoin, so many people hate it and they would do anything to stop it, unfortunately for them Bitcoin is a decentralized currency and there is no control unit that you can simply shut down to affect everything, impossible! This is also part of the reason why the government cannot stop Decentralized exchanges. If they ban Bitcoin, anyone that wants to make use of it will still find a way to do so.

Making a tiny allocation toward bitcoin doesn’t absolve investors of the need to do their homework before buying.

Users should learn more about digital assets, as well as the underlying blockchain technology first.

“Don’t consider investing unless you understand the technology,”. “Otherwise, you’re not investing; you’re spending.

He wanted to build the "peer-to-peer electronic cash system" : the whitepaper of bitcoin says it clearly. The system that is similar to physical cash, but with the ability of being transfered via Internet. Although these idea and realizaton were very ingenious, the creator of it could still underestimate the significance of his invention, it was impossible to predict that bitcoin could become the replacement of current monetary system and would start changing people's minds on how the system should really work.

I would say, it is not an alternative to fiat, but perfectly functioning system that is intended to replace it completely, the system that shows all the drawbacks of current monetary system and gives a solution at the same time.

I enjoyed the content when all was claimed. Its content and elegance make it relatable and alluring. This is because it could be, I think sometimes two types of focus are radicalized.

1. Dislikes Everyone agrees that Bitcoin is vital. However, if prices fall higher than this and these individuals will not say that it is a budget pyramid that will soon crash.

2. Few people can really accept that Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SV is the real person and I think they save the choice in the current conclusion despite the fact that these forks have endangered Bitcoin.

3. I do not know, yet Bitcoin is probably used by a select social subject, although quite a few people from different rallies use it, obviously.

Bitcoin is the first of its kind. Seriously, it’s going to be a tough battle for any other cryptocurrency to conquer Bitcoin and I don’t even see that happening, not anytime soon. Other cryptocurrencies are dying off, but Bitcoin retains its position as the number one and it keeps on growing and doesn’t seem to give up.

Bitcoin has faced a lot of challenges more than every other cryptocurrency has ever faced. People (the haters) neglect other cryptocurrencies and call Bitcoin the scam, and lots of them has tried anything possible just to bring down Bitcoin. Very funny. But despite everything they have tried, Bitcoin still keeps growing.

Dear, nullius.

"I have experience living without a bank account. It’s very difficult: You can’t use money normally, and you are shut out of many opportunities. That can impoverish you, and it can keep you in poverty. Bitcoin takes away the power of unaccountable corporations to shut down people’s lives on a whim, just because they don’t like them."

I love this thought towards Bitcoin because it reflects all my needs. Although I have been able to open bank accounts in my country, I cannot obtain credit because I have no credit experience and with Bitcoin, I can access the possibilities that suit me.

These are exactly the kind of articles that need to be placed on the main pages of the best publications in the world - bravo! I will definitely give it to all my friends to read. Of course, bitcoin is a social phenomenon, I subscribe to your every word. I can only add that I feel much calmer with bitcoin than with this entire banking system, and in connection with the latest global pandemic, we are still trying to impose on us not legal withdrawals from our accounts. I don’t mind losing some of my savings if I knew for sure that this would go to treat people. But I'm sure that part of the money is stolen by bank officials. God bless the one who invented bitcoin - my confidence in the future is precisely due to bitcoin.

The domination of bitcoin is too strong that there will be no other cryptocurrencies that can match it especially in terms of popularity and average number of usage. The bear market is already finished and there is now a signs that we are again entering the bullish market. Other cryptocurrencies are still not giving signs of recovery. Investors and traders are now focusing to the bitcoin because of the unusual movement last day where it rally amd achieve the price $9000 per each.

Nice topic, nice text, will merit when replenished ....

It’s easy atm, people in btc keeps increasing, interest and knowledge getting wider, still many in the area for a quick buck... they will break at some point or get the long term perspective over time.... (have seen it happen with some friends, as the breaking point as the becoming of a long term hodler)

—-> price will be driven up, as more getting in.... it’s a true social “phenomenon”, btc helped me out true payments that would have been very difficult through cash or through bank transfers, glad I had a medium of exchange as BTC for the last years.

Also as you said we all have payed each other in BTC and no one of us need to be told what to do with the received BTC.

Encourage them. Making a quick buck is a good introduction to Bitcoin in my opinion because then we can teach them how to store their coins, which software to use, then someday, convince them to buy and HODL. 8)

If you look at Bitcoin's performance this year is extraordinary, it will make Bitcoin's popularity increase, it's no wonder
if Bitcoin is said to be the social phenomenon. And a lot of people have started adopting Bitcoin, this is because there
are so many benefits that we can get from Bitcoin, from freedom to manage our own finances. Since no one can control
Bitcoin, this is something banks don't have. Another advantage of Bitcoin, volatile price can be used for trading. Because
we can make profit relatively quickly with the volatile Bitcoin price.

If it is or not is decentralized is been discussed many many times....

Outcome= most decentralized store of value .... no one can say what someone must do with there coins....

If one wanna believe that it’s centralized, then don’t enter and don’t be bothered

Bitcoin is decentralized. It's like BitTorrent, the U.S. or any state cannot, stop it, control it, and order a seize and desist on it.

Napster was centralized, the Liberty Reserve was centralized, not Bitcoin. OK?

Here's a different link for anyone who doesn't want to give that other site the traffic:  https://www.bitcoininsider.org/article/14340/cornell-researchers-bitcoin-not-decentralized-assumed (https://www.bitcoininsider.org/article/14340/cornell-researchers-bitcoin-not-decentralized-assumed)

The simple matter is, the distribution of hashpower is determined by market forces.  If the number of people mining was centrally planned and controlled, that's undoubtedly less decentralised than just letting the ecosystem evolve naturally.

That is Bitcoin! Bitcoin was considered as Social Phenomenon because it was already influenced and significantly affect the behaviors and opinions of million of people all over the world that now are using, investing and keep on patronizing bitcoin. The impact of bitcoin on people is enormous because it changes the lives, habits, lifestyle and thinking of people when it comes to valuing investment and whatever bitcoin value that you have.

Eventually, Bitcoin will become a historical event that can be passed down from generation to generation due to having a significant and history-changing impact.