Bitcoin Forum

The linked 5-minute video provides a simple and undeniable proof that the real value of Bitcoin is zero. It does that by showing that Bitcoin lacks the fundamental feature for which all financial instruments exist in the first place, and that is to provide payment to their holders.

https://youtu.be/WSYTXmxPveY

The price of bitcoin is zero only if no one will invest in it

bitcoin is not a product that is sold. bitcoin is a payment system. its only function is to move value.

the price of bitcoin is not 100% speculative at the moment its 50% cost of acquisition value which is controlled by the mining cost of cheaper to mine or cheaper to buy supply/demand economics. and then speculative volatility ontop.

gold for instance has a similar scheme where the price is ~$900 of acquisition cost value. and the rest is speculative

things like fiat only cost a few cents to make a $20 bank note. so fiats value is not held by its cost. but more so by laws that make it relevant.
the only reason why the dollar is relevant is because of wage/tax laws keeping it relevant. but here is the thing. if the US are contracted to debt of $xxtrillion. they can easily change the law to make a new currency relevant and because the debt contracts demand dollar. they can hyper inflate the obsolete dollar to a loaf of bread costing $xxtrill and pay off the debt

bitcoins value is bitcoins value. its not made relevant just by law. its made relevant due to its utility and due to the fact it actually costs something to acquire it

More nonsense videos from antikvark.

Why am I not surprised.

I suggest, DO NOT WATCH HIS VIDEO.  He posts here to drive up his view count on YouTube. Watching his video just increases his ability to distribute his nonsense to more people.

SWIFT is also a payment system. So? What that has to do with a value of a particular instrument transferred via this system?

In the video, you are confusing financial instruments with money. Money is not a financial instrument. Also, Bitcoin is not loan-created money, so your claim that Bitcoin makes no payments is irrelevant.

Also, Bitcoin cannot be a Ponzi scheme. There are no operators and it is 100% transparent. You either don't understand how Bitcoin works or you don't know what a Ponzi scheme is, or both.

Take a gold nugget, go to a random supermarket and try to pay for your groceries. Please let us know how it went.

There is no mention of money in the video. Money can be everything that functions as a generally recognized medium of exchange for transactional purposes. Financial instruments on the other hand, are paper or digital records. Given that records are worthless on their own, their issuers must pay something to their holders. They do that in all instruments except Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is ponzi-like. Its issuers pay nothing to its holders, the same as Ponzi scheme organizers pay nothing to scheme members.

In ALL TRANSACTIONS, payment is only possible from funds of someone else paying you.  That's the DEFINITION OF A FINANCIAL TRANSACTION.

You seem to like to say:

"Look, someone paid someone, in a Ponzi people pay people, therefore it is a Ponzi!"

Then when someone points out that there are lots of reasons that people pay people, and that they are not all Ponzi, you respond with:

"Those examples are beside the point.  In those examples, someone paid someone and since they were paid it's ok.  But in Bitcoin someone pays someone, and in Ponzi someone pays someone, therefore Bitcoin is a Ponzi!"

It's circular nonsense that carries no meaning.  Yes, in a scam, a person is convinced to give another person something of value. That is NOT what makes it a scam.  People give other people things of value all the time in situations that are not a scam.  Until you can understand this, you aren't going to get anywhere in this conversation.


One cannot be paid by someone that does not exist.  What matters is that holders should not expect to be paid by anyone for holding.  It is not an "investment" into a business.  It does not pay "dividends" or "interest".  It is inflationary money that will eventually become deflationary.


There you go saying words again that don't make sense, and that are contradictory.

I bet this is another FUD technique from one of the whales or financial institutions wanting Bitcoin price to crash for their selfish target. Well, such a device mechanism won't work now because the people are already hooked on Bitcoin. You can try this trash with the altcoins, I might work. But certainly not with Bitcoin. We move.

You must educate yourself about basic economic concepts.

When an instrument issuer pays divided, interest, principal or non-monetary value to an instrument holder this is not market transaction but the fulfilment of issuer's obligation.

On the other hand, market transaction is an instance of buying or selling something.

Finally, Ponzi-like is when you invest funds into some project or instrument that pays returns not from project's activity or funds of the instrument issuer, but from the funds of new investors. Bitcoin perfectly fits that definition.

I don't need to watch the video. I just need to look at the price of Bitcoin right now. It says Bitcoin is price valued at $9,405.65. That is enough to debunk any claim that Bitcoin's real value is zero. The real value of a few thousand bills in my country is probably worth less than a couple cups of rice. And yet, because of the value we assign to those small cuts of paper, we can actually buy a sack of rice with them. Every value is assigned.

Fidelity, a company with $2,460,000,000,000 under its management, seems to disagree: https://unchained-capital.com/blog/bitcoin-obsoletes-all-other-money/ (tweeted here: https://twitter.com/DigitalAssets/status/1223306849275076608?s=19)

You are horribly failing at what you're doing. No sure what your agenda is but you should consider.to stop wasting your time and go do something else.

Forgive me if I'm wrong but isn't it kind of different to compare Bitcoin to the rest as show in in the video? I mean, there's a single entity, let's say the company, that is behind those you call "issuers". Then, there's Bitcoin, in which your argument states holds no issuers.

The start is different because companies could produce their payments, while Bitcoin, in its entirety, already exists at its creation. Just that, it requires a community to pull it out, so we could technically say that the community is both the issuers and the holders. In situation A where companies issue money/stocks/etc to the world, after issuing it, it flows through the globe, but in Situation B, you can already say that the money flows to the globe without the need for someone to issue it, hence the unneeded factor of paying something back to its holders, because holders are issuers themselves, and at the same time, issuers are holders themselves.

The real value for bitcoins is above $9400 as you said, but perhaps in the traditional world bitcoins might not have any value yet. In the real world, traditional payment systems are been encouraged which includes paper money, digital centralized wallets like PayPal, etc which can easily be traded by the people for a specific value. Their value does not keep on changing to major extend as the time passes by which as compared to bitcoins might never have a stable price.

Bitcoins have most volatile price which can't allow the people/investors to rely on a single stable price of bitcoins and this is what might have kept the value of bitcoins zero to the real world who do not have the ability to understand the graphs and patterns.

Why did I know this vid would have a robotic voice before even opening it?

Show yourself and let's hear your honeyed tones, laboured breathing and sloppy chops.

As for the theme of the vid, that's lovely. Have fun.

When you tell the flat Earth or Bitcoin community that the Earth is round or that Bitcoin has zero real value, you are spreading FUD by definition. I got that. But what that has to do with Earth's shape or Bitcoin's value? Nothing. The topic at hand in not about emotions in the bitcoin community but about Bitcoin's real value.

Fidelity cannot change facts. The fact is that Bitcoin issuers pay nothing to Bitcon holders. The fact is also that the real value of a financial instrument is in a direct causal relationship with payment. The more an instrument issuer pays the higher the instrument's real value will be. And vice versa, the less it pays the lower the instrument's real value will be. If it pays zero the instrument's real value is zero. Whatever Fidelity does, won't change this casual relationship. This relationship is factual, empirical - you can observe it at every instance of economic reality.

Yes, I know this very well. Surely no one here wants to hold on to a volatile asset class and there are very few services that accept payments in bitcoin. But that's just the situation at the moment. What do you think about half of the world's population believes that bitcoin is digital gold? then many people will put money to buy bitcoin because it is traded a lot on large exchanges and buying it is easy. We can buy it for the right price and very low fee. As the crowd increasingly accepts that, the world will adopt a new type of digital asset. our world can happen anything, it is important how the crowd will prove it. I believe that bitcoin is now worth nothing, but one day in the future it will become the easiest asset to use and exchange. ;)

There are no 'Bitcoin issuers'. Maybe go back to reading the whitepaper before spewing more verbal diarrhea?

Bitcoin issuers are those who wrote the whitepaper, released the bitcoin software and launched the network.

Interesting, in the Satoshi White Paper  it says that Bitcoin s value comes from having it as a provable chain of signatures, where signatures are most critical in our internet world.

Second it calls for honest a lot.

You must be a fan of BSV, cause that's really following the white paper.

True is, any shitcoin that has no high potential of all sorts of interconnected things you need to have / transact / store onchain, just are worthless. Most are even non compliant and damned illegal.Top scam coin is XrP. Just printed security at will, no use

Same was said for bitcoin when it was launched in 2008, those who accepted and start accumulating it are now called whales. One has the right to say anything he want for bitcoin but the point is bitcoin is a reality.

What Fundemental feature are you talking about ?
Fundem feature is actually based on the age old traditional currencies whose value would plummet soon enough , Change is the nature of nature.
This is actually a very good example of how stupid can the humans be , wasting their time on Hating bitcoins and proving the value to be zero , instead go to your computer and give us a better option , discover a good option if your think this is a failure .

Why would anyone hate record in a database, as this is all what Bitcon is - a digital record held in a computer. I hate nothing. I am pointing out the human stupidity of purchasing this record for thousands of dollars although it pays zero monetary or non-monetary value to its holders. On their own, all financial instruments are worthless paper or digital records. That's why their issuers must provide some payment to their holders, and it is this payment what gives them value. Bitcoin issuers pay nothing, which renders Bitcoin worthless. Giving up valuable possessions just to be the holder of worthless digital record, is a very good example of how stupid can the humans be.

OK Mr. "I Hate Nothing" You're obviously taking a shit on bitcoin. You're implying that we're all idiots for holding bitcoin to have value and this is your defense: Oh I don't hate on useless bitcoin it's just a piece of software.

I'm not surprised you have 0 merits earned in this forum. I know that I and others will give merit where merit is due, even to bitcoin haters or people who have completely opposing ideologies to our own.

My only question is why? Why make this content?

Now let's rehash some points on to how bitcoin is not much different than other forms of money, and perhaps even better:


Here's how USD is created. A bank loans out $1000 using $100 of reserves. $900 created. Then the person who got the $900 gives it to someone else and he deposits $500 in the bank. The bank now can loan out another $5000.

It's all bullshit. Bitcoin may not be a physical thing but at least it can't be created using debt.

Now why do you hate on Bitcoin? Bitcoin does have inherent value as a utility. Gold is just a shiny metal and more can be mined or found.  Fiat currency is paper. Bitcoin's value is a monetary one but it also has proven scarcity so in my book it's superior to fiat and gold.

There are millions of people in the world that would give me a nice meal for some BTC I bet. And I would make someone a nice meal if they gave me some BTC. The world is still playing catch up but eventually there will be adoption. It may just take another 10-20 years.

edit: added "not" after "bitcoin may"

I am not implying that you're all idiots for holding bitcoin. I am implying that you act like idiots. Being an idiot and acting like one are two different things. Under extreme emotional pressure(greed) or due to ignorance, even intelligent people can act very idiotically. Those that would give you a nice meal for some BTC (worthless record) are good example of such behavior.

As far as I can see the video is mostly downvoted.
I watched a few seconds and it's funny that you're giving instructions about the banking system like it was a working machine, while in fact it's a malfunctioning machine that may soon completely break down.
You say "this is how loan works, this is how colateral works, this is what banks will do if they default" No! This is what they are supposed to do but they don't. If they were working as they were intended to centuries ago there wouldn't be a Lehman Brothers collapse and Deutche Bank wouldn't be firing half of its staff.

A sluggish engine is better than no engine at all. But FIAT engine is not sluggish since the majority of people do reply their loans and pledge collateral and in that way provide non-monetary payments to dollar holders. The rest of dollar holders are paid from bank's equity, since dollars are the liability of the banks.

Price for bitcoins might be zero for the real world, but considering the digital world where we all survive and earn profits, we all know how valuable bitcoins is. Bitcoins have no fundamental value because it does not guarantee the payee that the payer pays and hence it might not be considered as a regulatory mean of payment outside the internet and hence it might be determined as zero value.

But, it is not the case with bitcoins as transacting with them digitally over the internet proves the proof of funds and the transactions occur at the following blocks for specific price. There are two actual worlds. First, where there is no internet and traditional payment methods overrule the markets and the second where currencies are been evolved into digital currencies. It depends on you, which world you want to survive. I choose the second.

Bitcoin IS a valuable possession.

Bitcoin has value just like gold has value.  It is more like a commodity than a "financial instrument".  There are no "issuers" of Bitcoin, just like there are no "issuers" of gold.

Control over Bitcoins offers value on its own, so there is no need for "some payment to holders".

It took gold / XAU some 100 / 1000 years to come up / be there - and stil has quite high volatility


we have Bitcoin not close to any stable value after 5 years and lots of forks in the zero sum game

(Segwit is 2 years old ... forget that)

Nothing can be said yet

I agree with you. One who comes here looking for insight about how bitcoin and the blockchain system works should not go by this video said user just posted. Because they will have misinformation given to them by one of those robotic voice instructional type videos you see posted on youtube about such things as how eggs are dangerous for you and how the government is part of the illuminati (shadow government) and is just picking at straws to be honest.
What I am saying, there is no substance to this video so avoid adding to their view count please.
It stood at 114 so those individuals have been infected with utter nonsense and pure drivel.
One can say the current financial system is a ponzi with the banks not actually hold the funds you see on the screen in your own bank account.
I liked when a rally was done to schedule everyone to try and withdraw all the funds from their bank accounts. And see if the banks can do it.
I never did hear about the result of it but would be interesting to see what the outcome was done in that one country.

So we are greedy and we act like fools.

So where is the proof that bitcoin's "Real" Value is zero?

What gives anything its "Value"

I would argue that financial value can be easily proven through the market. Even if we were all greedy fools, then bitcoin still has value.

Define the word "Empirically" and you will find that it contradicts your whole argument. Things proven empirically are things proven in the real world, not based on logic or theory.

Your argument is a theory based argument.


It's almost as old as bitcoin. You are all greedy fools and bitcoin is worthless.

But empirically I have bought and sold things using bitcoin.


I have eaten my lunch at work using bitcoin and I have worked (a little bit) for bitcoin.
Empirically bitcoin has value and that value is not zero.

If empirically the value of bitcoin was zero, you wouldn't mind giving me 100,000 Bitcoins for $100 since you'd be able to get 100,000 Bitcoins for 0 dollars.

So prove it to me. Send me 100,000 Bitcoins.

Oh what, you can't?

That's right because I just proved you to be a total "can't" no offence given to can't with a U either.

Edit:    Changed "Bitcoin'" to "Bitcoin's"
Edit 2: Changed "do" to "to" in "to be a total"

Your whole post is based on ignorance between market value and real value. Watch the video again.

Do you believe this yourself?
Probably not, in other case you would not register on this forum.
Real value or not the truth stays the same - people were making money on it, they do and they will as long as the whole subject exists.

Personally I don't give an attention to such videos, doesn't matter whether it will be bitcoin related or not.
What has value? Can you really tell me? What's good and what's bad? We decide it, yeah? So can 100% say the same on value. Nothing has value in reality, for lion it doesn't matter whether you give it gold or iron, food is what they are looking for and crave.
The value of gold, oil and etc, all of this is psychological factor.
If we think like the author of video, then USD has no value, it's just a piece of paper and I own 48 of them in notepaper and I have 100x such notepaper, I should be very rich. But again, value is psychological factor.

Fortunately, Bitcoin has "real value", so market value doesn't matter.

Segwit killed that

Price is not value btw

It did not.


Correct.  Bitcoin has value. Coincidentally, it also has price, but price is only an attempt by the markets to try to determine what that value might be.

Value of financial instruments(records on digital, paper, plastic or metal medium) comes from payments that their issuers provide to their holders. Fiat currencies, the same as bonds, stocks, CFD-s, futures, options, ... are records whose issuers provide various types of payments to their holders during the circulation of these instruments, or at their maturity, liquidation or withdrawal from circulation. Dollars for example are liquidated or withdrawn from circulation at loan payments. Bitcoin on the other hand is a record whose issuers never pay anything to its holders, nor is Bitcon ever liquidated or withdrawn from circulation by these issuers. Bitcoin is therefore a worthless record in an infinite circulation, that operates the same as ponzi-like scheme, since its holders can be paid only from funds of new investors. Even a $100 poker chip is more valuable than all bitcoins in the world, since issuer of this chip pays an equivalent amount of cash for it, while Bitcon issuers pay nothing.

Okay, but what will happen if everyone uses Bitcoin and no one contributes fiat money to the cost of Bitcoin because there is enough for everyone the number of bitcoins that already exist? What will happen if people simply exchange bitcoins among themselves?

The fiat and bitcoin has the same speculative fundamentals because if you look at fiat for example the USD, it is only paper money with no real value that is backed with an scarce asset oil. The value depends on the supply/demand of  the market.

Wrong. It's true that BTC and USD are only digital or paper records, but USD issuers (banks) provide USD holders with payments in the form of interest, non-monetary value or collateral, as explained in the video. Bitcon issuers on the other hand, pay nothing to Bitcon holders. USD is backed by collateral of the borrowers or equity of the banks. Bitcon is backed by nothing. Bitcoin is worthless number next to your virtual address.

What do you think is mostly driving price up for BTC ?

I'm convinced it is only speculation.


Bitcoin is a protocol for value TRANSFER / audit  with its ledger

BSV has more value such  https://coingeek.com/the-next-genesis-bitcoins-two-beginnings/

People don't seem to be able to grasp that virtual assets can have real value. A novel is one example that I provide fairly often. Wouldn't it be great if schoolteachers, and the media could discuss real life topics, and not keep regurgitating globalist pap.

People don't seem to be able to grasp that declaring something "virtual asset" doesn't automatically mean it has value. Value is the benefit that a thing in itself provides to people. In goods and services this banefit is the ability of a thing to satisfy a particular want. In financial instruments this benefit is payment that instrument issuer makes to instrument holder. Bitcoin is a few digits in a memory. So one cannot use it for want satisfying. Nor its issuer pays something to its holder. This renders Bitcon worthless and declaring it asset, money, digital gold, coin, or whatever, won't make this fact go away.

Using your definition of "Financial Instrument", it is clear that




There are no Bitcoin issuers.  Just like holders of gold are not paid interest or collateral for holding gold, holders of Bitcoin are not paid interest of collateral for holding Bitcoin.


https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pricediscovery.asp


Speculation is nothing more than market participants contributing towards price discovery. Speculators both buy (provide demand) AND sell (provide supply).  For every purchase of bitcoin at an exchange, there is someone willing to sell at that price.  For every sale, there is someone willing to buy at that price.  There are millions of variables that all contribute to the spot price being what it is. Any attempt to label a single thing as the cause of the current price is nonsense and futile.

And declaring it a "Financial Instrument" and then stating that it is worthless doesn't automatically mean that it is worthless.


Finally, we are in agreement on something.  And yet, somehow, you don't seem to believe that Bitcoin provides a benefit to people?


Agreed.  And Bitcoin definitely satisfies various particular wants of various people.


Bitcoin has no issuer, therefore, it appears not to fit your definition of "Financial Instrument".  Perhaps if you stop thinking of it as something with an issuer, you'll begin to see that it gets its value from its ability to "satisfy a particular want" and stop demanding that the issuers that don't exist pay something to the holders.


Bitcoin is more than that.


You are clearly mistaken.  Many people DO use it for "want satisfying".


It has no issuer.


It does not.


And declaring it a Financial Instrument, and demanding that an imaginary issuer pay interest won't make it worthless either.

It doesn't matter what the market is, the factor driving prices is always speculation related. In all cases, the market tends to front run the potential 'utility' of an asset, which is why we see Bitcoin at $9k and BSV at $300....

I recall CSW having said that the value for BSV isn't that important, he wants BSV to be a platform people build on, which makes the applications on top of it valuable, BSV not so much.

Ethereum is the most built on platform and generates a shit ton of transaction volume, but its price is still under $200.... It's an indication that people value what's built on top of the protocol more than the native coin.

Using a thing for want satisfying means utilizing or consuming a thing. It doesn't mean transferring a thing from one person to another. Nobody can utilize or consume bitcoin. Bitcoin can only be passed from hand to hand, like membership stakes in ponzi-like schemes.

Yes it is my definition of a financial instrument. So? Defining something simply means describing exactly the nature, scope, or meaning of it. Which was what I did. Where is the problem?

Bitcoin issuers are those who wrote the whitepaper, released the bitcoin software and launched the network. Bitcoins don't just pop up into existence from nowhere. They have issuers like everything else.

Finally, Bitcon is not gold. Gold is an actual, tangible good that has value on its own. Bitcoin is a number - a mathematical abstraction next to your virtual address. On its own it's worthless.

Just like before, whenever they intend to buy more they usually cause a FUD for the weak to dump for them to buy. Please, tell them we aren't as before again, we have all learnt our lessons and won't dump for anyone anymore.

Please, never watch such ridiculous video from hell, consider yourself a loser, if you're here as a WHALE! we aren't going to fall.

If I use a house for satisfying the want of shelter, I do not "consume" the house.  If I use a car for satisfying the want of transportation, I do not "consume" the car. If I use gold for satisfying the want of store and transfer of value, I do not "consume" the gold.

That's just more nonsense.


So, Bitcoin doesn't fit your definition of a "Financial Instrument", and therefore should not be considered a "Financial Instrument" for the purposes of this conversation.


Not true.

There was no payment made for any of those things.  Those individuals provided a service (for free), and issued nothing.

If I write a whitepaper about how the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank works, it does not make the issuer of U.S. dollars.  If I write software that the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank uses to track the dollars that it issues, it does not make me the issuer of U.S. dollars.  If I set up a network for the U.S. Federal Reserve to operate their systems, it does not make me the issuer of U.S. dollars.

This is just more nonsense.


They actually do "pop up into existence".  Or, perhaps you could think of it more like, they always have been and always will be in existence, they are just "found" (much like gold).


Correct.  It is Bitcoin.  If it was gold, it wouldn't be worth as much.


Bitcoin is an actual intangible good that has value on its own.


Bitcoin is much more than that.


Clearly not.

You are doing nothing but playing semantics and red herring.

I've said utilizing or consuming. You utilize a car. You consume an apple.

Bitcoin fits my definition of a financial instruments as Bitcon is a record and all financial instruments are digital or paper records that are worthless on their own. But, Bitcoins lacks the fundamental feature for which all financial instruments exist in the first place, and that is to provide payment to their holders. Bitcon pays nothing. Hence, it is a worthless financial instrument.

Bitcoins don't pop up into existence, but are put into existence by design. That means they have issuers.

Declaring Bitcoin an actual intangible good doesn't make it valuable.

And you utilize Bitcoin.


Which is EXACTLY WHY Bitcoin DOESN"T fit your definition of a Financial Instrument (or at least one of the important reasons why).

Bitcoin is NOT "worthless on its own".


Because it does not fit your definition of "Financial Instrument".


Or...

Stay with me here...

Bitcoin is NOT worthless on its own, and the fundamental feature for which it exists is NOT to provide payment to it's holder, therefore...

It is NOT a Financial Instrument according to your definition.


They kinda do.


No, they do not.


And declaring Gold an actual tangible good doesn't make it valuable either.

And yet, they both are valuable.

Bitcoin has some non-classical fundamental features, not easy to see like

Commodity without a weight ( easy to transport)
Programmable , it could automatically settle, pay (dividends), change ownership, show receipts and trace ( to auditors)
Interoperable, feature atomic swaps, smart contracts on oracle conditions...
Micropayments to reduce spam if used as underlying for mail, google search,....
Only public ledger I know that works for all ( if fully scaled in data centers , like Satoshi told us...)

....


That s cool?

You don't utilize Bitcoin, but transferring it from one address to another. A car can be both, utilized and transferred. Bitcon can only be transferred. That's why one cannot use it for want satisfying. And that's why it is worthless. If the only thing that one can do with X is transferring it to someone else, then X is worthless by definition.

Yes, you are correct. Bitcoin doesn't fit my definition of financial instrument. Bitcoin is just a record and not all records are financial instruments.

Gold is not valuable due to declaration but due to utilization in dentistry, medicine, electronic, aerospace and jewelry. Bitcon can only be valuable due to declaration.

The monotonous computer generated voice in that video was extremely annoying.

Modern cars lose 14+% of their value every year though too so they're not great for transferrability and recouporation.

Cash can't exactly be utilised? Interest is a by-product of inflation and how well an economy is doing. If you sit with cash in your house, it's losing you money.


Well not really. Gold is a bit like Bitcoin now.
Most medical, electrical and chemical equipment uses platinum instead of gold since it's cheaper (even though gold is more inflated).

There are fairly worthless financial instruments people like to gamble with all the time and bitcoin may or may not be one of them. It's certainly getting a lot of hype but I don't think it's going to be the main coin in the future for payment systems - I'm not sure if a true cometitor ahs yet been found yet though either. Money was initally created to be a store of value, a promise that you'll get something for the gold you carry. As time went on it got stored in banks and people just transferred signed receipts to retrieve those funds, and then came fiat currency after that which currently aims to keep an economy growing for as long as it can by using inflation.

You're not meant to hold a lot of cash anyway, maybe the same can be said for bitcoin and you're meant to invest or hold other assets that actually pay you back (also there aren't many banks in first countries at least that acutally pay higher than inflation in interest).

Yes, I do.  As do many other people.


Bitcoin can also be utalized AND transferred.


This is false.


And yet one can, and does.


And yet, it is not.


Not true.  However, fortunately for this discussion, is transferring it to someone else is NOT the only thing one can do with Bitcoin.


Glad to hear you agree.  Since you agree that it is not a Financial Instrument (by your definition), can we please stop talking about "issuers making payments"?


Bitcoin is more than "just a record".  Regardless, at least we are finally in agreement that your rules for Financial Instruments don't apply to Bitcoin.


Nobody would pay $1500 per ounce for gold if its manufacturing and product uses were the only thing it was utilized for.  It is utilized to store and transfer value. This is what makes it as valuable as it is.


And yet, Bitcoin has value though there is nobody to declare its value. So, clearly that's just nonsense.

Bitcoin is valuable due to the valuable ways in which it can be utilized.

All of this is based on belief systems.

here are a few

"Nothing has value to anyone. The reason is  Basically we will all be dead and who really gives a fuck about anything at all."


Now drifting away from that belief system is this belief system.

"BTC has value."

Is there any difference no none both are things or ideas people can believe or not believe.

Right now as I type there are enough people that believe BTC has a value over 9000 USD to keep it above 9000 usd.

You are saying that it is worthless with no value at all.

Neither group is correct. It is just what they believe in.

At the moment you are believing an untruth since no one will give you btc for free.  they will want 9000 + usd.

One day  when all the people in the world are dead  you may be correct in your belief.

If it was 2007  or earlier  you were correct.  Most of us choose to believe btc was so motherfucking worthless it did not even exist.

Right now in 2020  you are are the wrong side of this particular belief .

I would wish you luck for believing in zero value, but frankly I prefer to believe it is up up and away for my coin of choice.  25,000 + usd by 2021

You declare my whole post ignorance while ignoring all my points.

1. You use the term empirically incorrectly.

Empirically means through experience and not by theory, through experience bitcoin has value

2. If BTC's Value was 0 you could send me BTC100,000 for $1 and you'd make a buck, but you can't, because the value of bitcoin is empirically not zero.

3. Implying that we're greedy fools on our turf (Bitcointalk)  is kind of hilarious but you have no argument. Your video is such garbage that I had to tune out within seconds.
I'm the kind of guy to watch 6 hour videos of badly produced audio and loops. And even I can't watch your shit video.

You're just repeating your empty assertions of Bitcon having value and ignoring reality in the process. I will now present you this reality with one simple question. Suppose that you've purchased all the bitcoins in the world. How can you utilize them? You've said that they can be both utilized and transferred. You've bought them all and you don't want to transfer them. So how can you utilize them for want satisfying?

1. Empirically, records whose issuers pay nothing to their holders are worthless. If a bond issuer goes bankrupt, this bond is a record that pays nothing and as such it's worthless. Bitcon is a record that pays nothing and that's why it is worthless as well.
2. You're not able to sent my poop to me. Does that mean my poop is valuable?
3. There's one theory called "The greater fool theory". This theory doesn't implying people are fools but that they act like fools. Similarly, I am implying that you act foolish and not that you are fools. Acting foolish and being a fool are two entirely different things.

1. Your argument is that bitcoin doesn't have value. You specified empirically. Your use of the term is incorrect. Anything else is irrelevant. If you can buy anything for bitcoin, including other currencies it empirically has value.

So you're classifying bitcoin as this thing "a record whose issuers pay nothing to their holders" and declare it "worthless". Bitcoin is not simply a record. It's a record that can't be falsified without tremendous, almost impossible effort on the part of a single attacker.

While your argument is irrelevant let me debunk it. There is no direct issuer of bitcoin except for all the people who use the network rules. So everyone who runs or has run a full node is an issuer. We agree to the rules therefore we issue the bitcoins awarded to the miners. We get paid in the form of either a secure network or bitcoins for the miners.


Dollars don't have value by themselves either. Dollars are created arbitrarily by the banks. If everyone who owns dollars is a "holder" than when the bank creates more dollars through a loan, most of the "holders" actually lose value in terms of inflation. Therefore even by your argument fiat is worse, not better than bitcoin.



2. This is not contradicting my argument at all. Dollars and Bitcoin can be sent electronically. If I sent you $1 in the mail or through paypal. Would you be able to send me BTC100,000? No. That is because bitcoin empirically has a non zero value.

Me not being able to send your poop to you is a weird argument. I don't see how it's relevant. Are you trying to get me to sell your own poop back to you? Does it have to be your own shit? In this case I can send you a link to the video you made on YouTube. I'll expect a payment of $100 or BTC0.01 Since your video is poop and you put it out in the world I think it qualifies.

3. Here we go again calling us fools but not providing an argument for it. I can guarantee you that a lot of bitcoin holders believe in the project for reasons other than financial gain.

Bitcoin could crash to a fraction of a cent and I'd still believe in the project. Bitcoin can't be frozen by the banks, can't be printed by the governments and can't be blocked by political interests.

I'm here to create a world that I won't to live in. Not to sell bitcoin to a greater fool.

1. I am not making an argument. I am stating facts. The fact is that if a particular financial record such as bond, pays nothing it is valueless. Bitcoin is also a financial record. It is not a good that you can eat, drink, put on your finger or edit text with it. It is simply a database record. A record that pays nothing, just like a bond of a bankrupt issuer. So empirically, Bitcoin is not a good to have value through utilization or consumption. Bitcoin pays nothing to have value as a classical financial instrument. Bitcoin is simply a worthless record that you transfer from one virtual address to another. You bitcoiners have been purchasing this worthless record for thousands of dollars and now you try to rationalize your irrational behaviour by simply declaring bitcoin valuable. You are just repeating the mantra "Bitcoin has value". That's all. You deny the concept of value and try to give value to bitcoin by declaration.

2. E-mail that contains a single letter and mp3 file containing "bip" sound, can be sent electronically as well. So? This doesn't give them value. Value is something that is inherent to a thing itself. It doesn't magically emerge when you transfer that thing from one location to another.

3. I am not calling you fools. I am saying that you act like fools. Being a fool and acting like one are two different things. Under extreme emotional pressure(greed) or due to ignorance, even intelligent people can act very foolish. Purchasing a record, that pays nothing and that can't be consumed or utilized like a good, for thousands of dollars is the definition of acting foolish.

The value of things is not production value, the value of things is determined by usefulness. This is subjective and changes from person to person, place to place, and even time and individual situation.

The market price is a collective result of these interests. It is the REAL price.

Imagine you are in the desert without water for days, buy carry a gold nugget, you find a caravan and they happen to have water. You are willing to part with the nugget for the water, even if to them picking up the water and carrying it across the desert didn't cost much (and they have plenty of it).

Or, trying to sell ice to people in the north pole. Extreme and unlikely but you get the point. All the value of things a varying degrees of this.

You could also look at online games, their items and scarcity. Everything is artificial, lines of code, and yet to the people playing some are willing to give real cash for "silly" things like magic swords or such. Perhaps to you the (real) money is more valuable and for the buyer the rare item is more valuable. Once again, production didn't matter.

Of course abundant things tend to be valued less than scarce things, hence bitcoins (finite) will always cost more than dogecoins (infinite). The rule of supply and demand always applies, in addition to subjective value.

1. You're not stating facts, you're making a bad argument. You're just like a Jordan Peterson, you make constant straw man arguments, you then valiantly slay these straw men, and then declare that you've proven a wider point. Bitcoin empirically has value, you can buy things with it. If you were honest you'd admit you can't disprove that.

I even debunked your dumb little, non-empirical by definition theory.

2. You don't understand how bitcoin works. You never send a .mp3 or whatever file containing the bitcoins. You run a little script that shifts ownership of the coins to someone else. You hold the keys, and while the keys themselves could be copied that would only mean that a third party would use the keys to steal the bitcoin and then hold it secure with their own private key.

3. Your post self contradicts this.



Finally I can't hold your hand here. I don't think this is a high quality topic so from here on out, I let this die.

I tried to get you out towards the shores of sanity, but you choose to wallow into the mud of stupidity, once the night comes you'll die of hypothermia. No-coiner. May your fiat's value forever decrease and may you never have enough insight to even realize it.

after this failure from your created thread last year here

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5183408.0

now youa re back with another BS?did you ever find even one that supports your stories?if not then stop it mate because youa re only fooling your self here.

---

the truth?how many viewers have you earned from that Video?don't tell me you gathered "ZERO"?sorry to hear that if does.

remember that you are in Bitcointalk.org and how would you expect people here to react on this BS?

It's value is based on what bitcoin is:
It' is virtual, like your money in your plastic card.
It's useful - You can transfer it to everyone and have no restrictions like when creating a bank account for example, you need almost nothing to own bitcoin, just piece of paper is enough.
PoW - You have to actually do some work in order to create one, investing electricity and CPU power. It's not coming from the tin air.
It's unique - you can't fake it, you can't manipulate it, you can't cheat.  
It gives you anonymity - no one is messing with what is yours.
It gives you possibilities - you can pay with in a shop, order stuff online, trade with it.

 

Incorrect.

In your mistaken opinion, records whose issuers pay nothing to their holders are worthless.

Empirically, some records are worthless (such as your example of a Bond), and some are not worthless (such as a record in the Bitcoin Blockchain which provides control over value)


Try reading what he said again.  He didn't say that it was valuable because it couldn't be sent.  He said that it was valuable because you can't gain value by trading it for something valuable.  If you trade your poop for something valuable (such as $1), and you lose value, then clearly your poop had value (more than $1 worth of value).  If you trade your poop for something valuable (such as $1) and you gain value, then clearly your poop had less value than the thing you traded for ($1).


Greater Fool Theory is a theory that ALL items of value (not just Bitcoin) get their value from the expectation of the buyer that they will be able to sell the item to someone else later at a higher price.

If you are a believer in Greater Fool Theory, then you already believe that the value of gold comes NOT from any intrinsic value of its utilization, but from the fact that buyers believe they can find a "greater fool" to buy it from them for a higher price.  You already believe this of ALL items of value (that the value comes not from anything intrinsic or inherent in the item, but rather from the belief that it can later be sold for more than was spent to buy it).


You are sharing an opinion that is based on false beliefs.


Ok.


I thought we already reached an agreement that Bitcoin does NOT fit your definition of Financial Instrument.  I thought we were making progress.  Now here you are reverting back to false statements.  It's almost like you are so fixated on distributing nonsense that you are unwilling to learn to remember what you've said in the past.


No, I can't eat, drink, put on my finger, or edit text with it.  However, I can't do any of those things with a car or a house or a piece of land either.  There are more ways to utilize something than your short list.


Bitcoin doesn't need to pay anything.  It isn't a Financial Instrument.  We've already established this.  Furthermore, it is valuable. It contains value in its existence because it can be used to satisfy wants.  Maybe not your wants, but certainly the wants of others.  Perhaps try opening your mind to the idea that there are people that want different things than you want.


Again false beliefs.

Bitcoin IS a good that has value through utilization.


Because it is NOT a classical Financial Instrument.


It is not.


Or perhaps, you missed out on the opportunity earlier to see Bitcoin for what it actually is.  You are now bitter that those that saw the potential have benefited from that foresight, and you are rationalizing your lack of foresight by simply declaring bitcoin worthless.


You are just repeating the mantra "Bitcoin is worthless."  That is all.


It is you that is ignoring the concept of value and attempting to make bitcoin worthless by declaration.


It does if it is something that someone wants and something that is difficult to acquire.


False.  Value is assigned by humans based on their current wants and needs. A thing has no value inherent to it until a human wants or needs it.


No.  It magically emerges when one or more humans decide that they want or need it.  A random painting by a random two year old child, has great value to the parents of that child, and nearly 0 value to most of society.  A painting proved beyond doubt to have been created by Leonardo Davinci, has great value only because society desires it.  Both are paintings, and yet value to society has magically emerged on one and not the other.


And purchasing Bitcoin, which can be utilized like a good, for thousands of dollars is perhaps the definition of acting wise and prudent.

You presented nothing but ad hominems and one wrong statement that value of Bitcon comes from the act of buying something with Bitcon. Unfortunately buying something with X has nothing to do with X's value. Value is property of a thing, while buying something is a human behavior. For e.g. you can trade your car for a blank sheet of paper, but this won't make this paper valuable. This is because the utilization capacity (real value) of this paper is pretty low and don't magically change due to transaction. Such trade would only prove that your behavior was irrational and foolish because you traded a thing with high utilization capacity for a thing with nearly zero utilization capacity.

No actual content exists in your response. You behave like a child. You simply copy/paste my sentences and edit them to fit your narrative.
And of course you have completely ignored my question that exposes this narrative of yours. Here's the question:

Suppose that you've purchased all the bitcoins in the world. How can you utilize them? You've said that they can be both utilized and transferred. You've bought them all and you don't want to transfer them. So how can you utilize them for want satisfying?