Lets test these claims in practice.

Recent Bank runs in China:

More infos here:

• Did the system pay the owed money back, when the banks couldnt? No. (Just up to $7,442, but we will never be able to verifiy if it actually happens, we can try to get more infos on friday when the money should be paid)
• Could people withdraw their money, that was worked for a long time? No.
• Do running living costs care, if you cant pay now, because your bank doesnt work? No.
• Life savings lost forever? Yes.
• So if the customers didnt get their money back, what was repaid to them? State violence and silence by the world. https://twitter.com/Byron_Wan/status/1546014495784349696 https://twitter.com/Byron_Wan/status/1546025798145957888

Does this only happen in „third world“ countries?

• First of all, it doesnt.
• Second of all, every human in the world has the right to keep their life savings and money they worked for, no matter where theyre from. A wipeout has consequences that cant be made unhappened later on.

What are your practical suggestion for a person that just lost millions, or 40 years of work, without having done anything wrong?

After your logic, a victim of these things in china, would have been fallen for a scam if they put their money into Bitcoin, even tho they would still have it now. And they wouldnt have been scammed by having their money in fiat, even tho people just lost everything.

Thanks, i wasnt sure how it works between different evm chains, as i never used them. But i just checked, on Ledger Live:

Ethereum uses "44'/60'/0'/0/0"
Cronos uses "44'/394'/0'/0/0"

So what about the metamask method the ethereum guys suggested?

It’s not just advisable, but necessary if he ever types in his seed somewhere, that he has withdrawn every coin beforehand and never uses this seed again in the future. Just to make it more clear for a newbie.

If someone nukes the U.S do you think you can still sit here and comfortably trade on the market? Maybe think about what would happen after someone nukes the U.S first, and what their allies would have to do. The world is not an isolated place, 1 nuke will affect the whole world, as it would mean everyone starts nuking each other.

If you’re in some isolated place where it won’t matter, then it’s a place where markets don’t matter too. Also Bitcoin is a worldwide Peer-to-Peer network, it’s not exclusively run by data centers. In a post apocalyptic world money won’t matter in the first place, it will be about survival and finding resources. So don’t even get the idea that some apocalyptic events would smh play into your favour.

It depends on how extreme the cbdc is going to be. I also think cbdcs are coming, because otherwise fiat could likely collapse. This system is more fragile than ever, so they don’t really have an alternative to complete control, if they wanna keep it alive. This is just a worse form of money that won’t survive forever, as it can’t enable free trade and has the worst monetary properties you could think of, from an economic perspective.

Flirting with tyranny has its own cost tho and central planning will never work in the long term(or it would’ve already, it’s just destructive and doesn’t benefit people), cbdcs won’t change anything about that. If they can’t provide an alternative system where people can prosper freely, this would just buy them time before they get replaced.

Bitcoin will easily co-exist with any system that could be in place, you can’t really stop or forbid it, because it’s too decentralized. So people will always have an alternative where they can transact freely, in times of cbdcs this could draw more people to Bitcoin, no matter if it’s allowed or not. More and more people could realise the advantages of having a free, independent form of money, driving adoption up. When the time of cbdcs ends, Bitcoin could have so many people on it’s side, that it could be chosen as the new monetary system by people. This can be seen as a chance to prove itself and a really good solution to the underlying problem cbdcs tried to solve in the first place.

In the end it’s a question of, can a broken system be kept alive forever with more control, or will an actual solution take over? To me the first option seems unrealistic, so it’s a matter of what comes after it.

Just go on ledger live.

• Download the chronos app onto your ledger.
• Then create a chronos account and check the balance.

You might be lucky and the seed is correct and you can get your 500$ back, this is literally risk free to do and something your ledger is built for. No third party software needed. All original ledger processes. Then just send the chronos back to the exchange and send your ethereum back to the ledger(this time as erc20 and a new correct address from an ethereum account on your ledger live), after this you can uninstall the chronos app again.

I don’t think it’s about having an edge over others, but about Bitcoin itself and their own piece of the pie ofc. We also don’t know what effect tail emissions would have on potential late adopters, as there will be many competing assets without it, and having some sort of inflation mechanism could make Bitcoin less competitive. Leading to less adoption again and then potentially devaluing the amount miners would have earned too(1 BTC in transaction fees only, could be worth more than the same amount in a tail emission model). We can’t assume Bitcoin will have won it all already. The value proposition Bitcoin offers now, will be huge even to late adopters, if we compare it to other assets.

Also the security budget is important, but we don’t know if the absolute amount is the only relevant metric to consider yet. The access to attractive locations and the distribution of mining should be considered too. There is places with close to 0 electricity costs, and as Bitcoin rises in adoption and the potential price increases become less. Mining might become so competitive(barely profitable) that it could just be possible for a few big players anyways, and be almost exclusive to locations like this. Which will also make attacks from the outside harder again, without access to these locations(it could make it more expensive than the security budget itself). Or even make it hard for new miners to join, as it will be hard to get access to locations like this. A tail emission also doesn’t change how mining will be distributed as it becomes more and more competitive. The more competitive mining becomes the less relevant the absolute security budget could be.

There is one small difference, the block subsidy affects the circulating supply. It doesn’t matter if the total circulating supply stays under 21 million, or doesnt inflate, for this effect to take place.

As a non-miner:

• If the circulating supply increases, your piece of the pie decreases over time in this model(tail emissions).
• If the circulating supply stays constant, you missed out on some increasing value you would have gotten otherwise from deflation.
• If the circulating supply decreases, your increase in value would have been less than otherwise.

This affects all coins ever created regardless if they get used or not. In this scenario miners get enriched and have a kind of cantillon effect playing into their favour. Transaction fees might depend more on the fact that blocksize is limited and would be high anyways due to the limited space, this wouldn’t be lessened trough tail emissions. Just because we’re paying miners subsidies doesn’t mean we get cheaper fees. So i would argue tail emissions is the bigger enrichment, but the real downside is what i listed above. It affects monetary properties directly.

The Transaction fees only model doesn’t have this, that is the advantage, it’s not the enrichment that would be the danger. Even small changes can have big effects over longer periods of time.

And then we don’t even know if tail emissions would even be enough in the end. But if we as a community open the doors to trying to print our problems away, then people in the future might be tempted to take it even further. The best solution would be transaction fees only, if we want to keep Bitcoin the soundest money possible. It won’t be impossible to compensate miners when the most sound money in the world depends on it. So in my opinion keeping the original properties is more important, than trying to lessen some uncertainties now.

Its a fair point, if anyone could just make up numbers, there might be too many. So the solution would be that only me and Snowshow can create numbers on Viber, and we will send them to a few contacts who can distribute them for us. To verify theyre using only the allowed amount of numbers, we will make sure that 1% of their numbers will stay in reserves with us, this is enough to make sure the system wont collapse. And then new numbers can also be created trough loans given by our contacts, people have to repay that debt every month by sending enough numbers back to our contacts. That is enough to provide utility to people. With these numbers you will be able to get hookers, lambos and blow in return, as these are the most important resources. Anyone that questions that this system is not legit, is a cultist promoting a different, worthless, numeric dumping scheme, as only our solution can provide utility and has resources. Then you can compare the degree of utility of our resources(hookers, lambos, blow) with other resources, and then know for how much to exchange it for. So our system is backed by both debt and our reserve resources. It just works, when you follow Snowshow economics 101, nothing could go wrong here, as we just followed what actually matters for money.

We will give you a huge amount of the supply beforehand, then will print 20% more numbers every year and then just give most of it to people close to us, like you, so dont worry about specific amounts, this effect will be called trickle down economics, and it will benefit everyone in society equally in the most efficient way possible.

There are some available for half of that i think.

Did we just discover a financial revolution? And snowshow just tried to get us there all this time? See JJG i dont know with what amount your personal f*** you status is reached, but ill just send you 1.000.000.000 to make sure. We broke the system, Snowshow just couldnt understand how we didnt realise this earlier and were still bothering with Bitcoin. Viber is the revolution.

It works, but then the limit is how long you are alive, there will be enough people bringing coins in circulation and if they dont, it wont impact the economy, as they’re like lost coins for the time theyre not being used. Its unrealistic to think that a human will never spend/ invest any considerable amount of money in their lifetime, when they have the opportunity to do so. And if theres a few people who saved till the end of their lifes, then idk if theres a justification for devaluing their wealth artificially, just because of this.

Also i get that inflation is an economic tool to incentivise spending, but we shouldnt act like it doesnt work without it. No inflation works as an incentive for wiser spending, and i prefer this alternative as its something the world could really need.

Could possibly happen, but then a coin with fixed supply might attract more people again, just like now.

How would tail emissions solve distribution? As whales with that much economic power will be able to acquire more mining equipment/ can afford the best suited locations and then getting more subsidies additionally. This could actually have the opposite effect, more concentration of wealth in the hands of early whales, than without tail emissions.

As Bitcoin grows in adoption, hodling will bring less and less gains, forcing these old hodlers to participate in actual economic activity/ spending if they want to benefit from their wealth, which will jump start redistribution even without tail emissions.

The problem might be the cost of mining in the future, making it too expensive for locations without close to 0 energy costs. If mining will be too centralised, a tail emission might not impact security as much, as it doesnt matter if the same small group of miners can afford to run more machines. And it might not actually be able to allow for better distribution of mining in the first place.

What is printed on a bill? What is being sent when you do a wire transfer? Camels? Why would anyone do wire transfers if they can send numbers on viber or other chat apps? Here i'll send you a 2000 now, lets hope it magically reaches your bank account number. Bitcoin is a payment system, not a random number, how will you design a payment system without numbers? How does what youre saying about numbers have any relevance? Or because Bitcoin isnt mandated by the state its equivalent to sending nothing, is that what you wanna suggest here?

The reason is simple, with 40,000$ in Bitcoin you will be able to acquire resources, with a 40,000 on viber you wont be. And this 40,000$ is put in a system with the properties we mentioned many times now(censorship resistance, limited supply, not confiscatable etc). While the fiat system has worse qualities, to just store these 40,000$ in a bank account, with risks we also already mentioned.


If there was something to correct with what I’ve said, you would’ve done so. I dumbed it down on purpose. Is fractional reserve banking a conspiracy theory? And the minimum reserve requirement the ecb set, too?

This isnt relevant to people who deposit their money into a bank. What if there was negative interest rates and youre loosing money for depositing it, how is it still beneficial? Because this is already happening where im from.

There is utility in the banking system, but the abuse got out of hand, that is the point. It could work perfectly, if trust wouldnt be abused again and again. In essence what i said was, that deposits arent fully covered/ insured anymore, ofc its more complicated than my previous post made it seem. In a bank run only the first few people will be able to withdraw their money fully, because its not fully backed. When a bank goes bankrupt the borrowers are still ofc obligated to repay, but there is a systemic risk now for any big bank going bankrupt, this would have snowball effects. Ever heard of the term too big to fail?

The seed will never leave the ledger otherwise, i wouldnt have suggested it. Metamask has native integration to work with hardware wallets. But he should try not going this route first, and try out option 2.

This just shows how bad you are at checking your own sources. Scroll down a little.


You just attempted to twist meanings and make them exclusive to your narrative, that you need a dictionary to realise that utilization means also just using something is the funny thing. See you just did what youre accusing others of again.


But they barely hold any reserves, only 1% of your actual money in the bank is actually there, this is the current requirement, the rest is just imagination that was created out of thin air, so if youre holding 500€ on the bank for example, only 5€ are actually there. And if you happen to be wealthy only 100.000€ of the account are insured, so after this amount 0€ actually exist in your account, and in a case of emergency its not even clear if they can pay out any insurance, this is just to make it seem like theres any security, so people dont get the idea to withdraw their money.


And this effects compounds with the amount of people using them, they will just use your 495€ to give loans to other people, and when all of you want to withdraw their money at similar times, it wont be possible, cuz this much was never on there in the first place.

Now tell me a bigger ponzi than this. Youre putting money into something and 99% of it will just be used, to give non existent money to people, do you get now where inflation is coming from? When each time you deposit something 99% of it will be misused, and this only works, because enough people are not withdrawing their money and leaving it on the bank. Once too many people withdraw their own money the bank collapses.

And this doesnt include when the central bank prints money yet.

Like i highlighted above there are just nice sounding stories you just created, something you accuse Bitcoiners of.

You cant actually with Bitcoin, if you run the same software you will just connect to the same network with the same rules, if you change rules your instance will split into another altcoin into its new network, with no users and be worthless and not be Bitcoin anymore. Bitcoin is unique, even as a software.

Finally we agree franky, also someone who wants any token to even be backed by a fiat shitcoin, didnt understand yet what Bitcoin is here to fix. Maybe its time for people to understand for people what theyre actually using and its good Bitcoin doesnt make it that comfortable, if they expect a user experience that adjusts to 0 iq, but actually its not even hard to use Bitcoin when using the brain just slightly.

I would be willing to for sure, i would even be fine with if he still considers Bitcoin useless for himself, but this extreme blindness about any arguments is just mind blowing. If he would just admit that his arguments were wrong, but he still doesn’t want anything to do with Bitcoin, it would be fine to me. Im not here to force any outcomes, but it’s the basis of his arguments that is completely ridiculous, they got debunked many times now. Just because something has a market, doesn’t make it a worthless dumping scheme, its comfortable to judge something, without looking at it.

The irony is that the fiat system creates an environment were actual dumping schemes are created, im just saying Wirecard, Lehman Brothers, Panama papers, CumEx files, JP Morgan Chase market manipulations, Libor scandal, UBS rogue trader scandal, and these are just a few examples, anyone who knows finance knows that this system is a complete playground for frauds, with billions upon billions in damages every year, and the population is the one paying for it. We didnt even get into companies buying and selling their own shares on the stock market yet, playing with their own investors. How much time did he spend to warn people about this?

This whole financial system is a ponzi scheme, just because they look professional, dont open their mouths in public, and the population has no clue whats going on and gets distracted easily with bs, like bashing Bitcoin instead of actual problems, this bs is still alive. Then theres people here claiming Bitcoin is a ponzi just because it exists on a market, when its actually trying to fix this broken system, all of the fiat bs is just backed by lies and the stupidity of the population. How can someone be so dumb to try to prevent an escape out of this? Self sabotage or conflict of interests?



In the phase we’re in right now, the best use for Bitcoin is probably primarily being a Store of Value, just sit there, be safe, don’t get confiscated and that’s probably already the biggest benefit a good could possibly provide in the current fiat craziness. If we’re thinking about Gresham’s law, why should the “precious metal”(Bitcoin) be used over the cheap one(Fiat) in daily circulation. As long as the bad money circulates, the good money will rise in value so we have no urgency for anything, never fold out a winning hand.

Bad money drives out good money, so what these big blockers suggested really doesn’t matter, as the different utilization will come naturally, when the bad money is gone. Any try to force something to be used differently, like increasing the block size will be useless, like we saw in practice. Hodling might be the best utilization of Bitcoin currently.

Or hes on some government payroll and doesn’t want to bite the hand that feeds him and maybe tries to rationalise his decision in some way, to feel like hes making the right decisions.

But living costs are exploding everywhere, idk how people can still sit here and think nothing is wrong with the current system, my only explanation would be that theyre one of the few that profit from this bs overall, so they became completely clueless.

Sometimes pain will be the best teacher and humans cant resist the urge to try something themselves. It can also depend on the current learning level and people around oneself, it takes some time to realise Bitcoin-only is the way, most dont start like this. When i didnt understand much about Bitcoin and shitcoins, and i first heard the idea Bitcoin-only is better, it didnt come naturally to me, it sounded odd, then i actually took the time to study and go in deeper, and spared myself from shitcoinery. But with superficial level knowledge this will just sound odd and they might not look into it more deeply.


You might be right and maybe in the end we should just laugh about each other, we can laugh at him for not getting it, and he can laugh at us because he thinks were in a ponzi. In the end were all humans and depend on each other, doesnt matter if smart or dumb. And fighting over one one disagreement wont get us any further. We will purchase what we like, and he can purchase what he likes.

Amen, Bitcoin changed the world, not some rainbow nft centralized pos cefi venture capitalist ponzi.


I hope so, initially i just registered on this forum to read some of the old posts, but i never really followed something else. Then one day i logged in and saw this thread and i couldnt believe someone could seriously think this, so i actually wrote a post for the first time. Without this thread i maybe wouldnt be here right now, so atleast i give Snowshow that. And despite this whole thread being completely crazy, theres actually some higher quality posts here than on some other threads. Its not all bad and in the end, its actually kinda funny.

Utilisation just means making use of something, it doesnt matter if it makes sense or not, especially not in your test(its a pointless waste of time, that is not interested in having practical results). You were never interested what Bitcoin really offers in the first place, you never even asked 1 single genuine question and refuse to answer 99% things asked to you.

Youre utilising your time too, even tho it seems like a waste of time to me, with how you are utilising it. And yet im not here mentioning anything about it, because its not my business. It seems more and more to me like you have some kind of mental illness, so maybe i should take a step back. It wouldnt be your fault. Even tho the bs you are producing is just insanity.

You doubted you can use Bitcoin 200.000 times more, if you have 200.000 times more of it, but its possible, thats what i showed you.

In practice your requirements dont even matter, that is the point. You can do nothing with 200.000 bills if no one accepts them, you can do nothing with 200.000 gold bars if no one accepts them. In theory you can make use of gold, but 99% of people cant themselves. And your requirement was that no other person can be involved, because it would count as „dumping of shares“.

But it doesnt matter, because people will always accept fiat, gold and bitcoin. This can vary over time, but wont change anytime soon. This is the point of money, it is not used primarily for some other bs, just like you dont expect your bike to fly. And it gets its value from being used as money primarily.

Now imagine a good:

• With the best monetary properties ever created.
• Inside a system that can transfer/ store information in a manipulation free, permissionless way worldwide.
• With a protocol that cant easily be changed or stopped, because its decentralized.
• With being able to recover your money from anywhere, because its based on cryptography.
• With no person being able to confiscate it from you.
• With being able to become a part of the network yourself without asking for permission.

This just created trustless money in the first time in history. Its already starting to take off, was the most successfull investment in the last 10 years. And were here discussing about if it has value or not, its pathetic and obvious. If you dont see it now, ill stop replying out of respect, if its caused by psychological or medical conditions.

Its not just about this, but EIP-1559(burning of coins in transactions) already makes ethereum useless for newbies with small amounts, combined with potentially crazy transaction fees. Then we also have an upcoming merge to a flawed form of security with unknown consequences. And ethereum is even more volatile than Bitcoin. Its only argument is to be platform for shitcoins and jpgs that are stored on centralized websites. A weak use case. Theres not a single reason why someone should prefer ethereum over Bitcoin, and especially not a beginner.

Not your keys, not your coins. Even more advanced people shouldnt solely/ at all go into leverage, because you can also get into debt quickly. And the primary focus of a newbie should be learning and taking self custody, not getting some profits faster.