...
With all due respect, you're just passive-aggressively grasping at straws to continue fighting me like a douche.
...  |
|
|
|
...
I don't just say resilience because by "existential stability" I mean precisely "existential stability" and not some other thing... The word "existential" doesn't mean what you think it does. To people who dropped out of grade school it means nothing, and to those who've persevered through high school it brings to mind angsty books by Sartre & Camus. Doing a Google search for the word pair "existential stability" nets me a total of 2,070 results, none of which (other than your typings) suggest your intended meaning. "Existential stability" is just another meaningless phrase, coined by idiots trying to sound smart. |
|
|
|
...
Well it is just unfortunate that the calendar year started as the price toppled from its previous bubble high... ...and continued to tank throughout the year. |
|
|
|
|
^
So have you closed your leveraged longs yet?
|
|
|
|
...
If by "existential stability" you mean "resilience," then why don't you just say "resilience?"
It doesn't sound as smartiferous. |
|
|
|
...Just ask Microsoft.
... Microsoft couldn't care less about Bitcoin's stability. It would accept autumn leaves as payment, as long as there was a payment processor exchanging those leaves into USD & Microsoft didn't have to touch them |
|
|
|
...
Nope, I up'd your 10% and gave you 0%
The USD is perfectly stable when measured in USD over all arbitrary time-frames.
Your tautology is just fine.
We can pick arbitrary exchange pairs and timeframes until your cartoon animals fade to black. Bitcoin will still be around long after you waste your time trying to convince people of anything.
Fruit flies have better memory than you. Allow me to help, look for the red boldface text, and the words "buying power": ...
The USD hasn't remained within 10% of anything except the USD, which is all that it is redeemable for anyhow.
The buying power of the USD has remained within 10%, educate yourself.The buying power of BTC has dropped by 65% in the last year alone. And that's vis-a-vis teh USD, so, according to you, likely much more.  |
|
|
|
The buying power of the USD has remained within 10%, educate yourself. The buying power of BTC has dropped by 65% in the last year alone. And that's vis-a-vis teh USD, so, according to you, likely much more. Straw man much? I told you what I meant by 10%. You chose to ignore that. Grasping at straws much? *Bitcoin not depreciating more than 65% implies that the USD didn't depreciate at all, if the logic of that is not obvious. |
|
|
|
The Argentine Peso was a case-study justification for Bitcoin, until Bitcoin underperformed even it  If we pick an arbitrary time-frame where that is true, sure. Can say the opposite also. Discussing existential stability, we still have to wait a while in order to see which one is here in the end. >existential stability What does that mean? Another meaningless phrase coined by coiners? You could probably figure it out from the rest of the sentence, but there is a hint for those without English language skills or dictionaries: The first part of the word sounds like "exist". Lol, so "stability that exists"? Vs. "stability which doesn't exist"? Way to sound all smartarific there, NewLiberty |
|
|
|
Bitcoin relies on math. So do banks. So do random number generators. So do shitcoins. If you seriously need examples of things more stable than Bitcoin, there's the dollar. And the peso, for that matter The difference being that each of the national fiats rely on a particular regional taxation and military regime and those people pulling its strings to keep those strings untangled, unbroken, and well sorted. Lol, the dollar, which is There is nothing more unstable than people. You are evidence enough of that. Over the lifespan of Bitcoin, its value has increased by 999999999%, and over the last year has tanked by ~65%. In the same timespan, the USD has remained within 10%. Just stop, brah. Why, you can't handle the truth? The USD hasn't remained within 10% of anything except the USD, which is all that it is redeemable for anyhow. The buying power of the USD has remained within 10%, educate yourself. The buying power of BTC has dropped by 65% in the last year alone. And that's vis-a-vis teh USD, so, according to you, likely much more. |
|
|
|
The Argentine Peso was a case-study justification for Bitcoin, until Bitcoin underperformed even it If we pick an arbitrary time-frame where that is true, sure. Can say the opposite also. Discussing existential stability, we still have to wait a while in order to see which one is here in the end. >existential stability What does that mean? Another meaningless phrase coined by coiners? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin relies on math. So do banks. So do random number generators. So do shitcoins. If you seriously need examples of things more stable than Bitcoin, there's the dollar. And the peso, for that matter The difference being that each of the national fiats rely on a particular regional taxation and military regime and those people pulling its strings to keep those strings untangled, unbroken, and well sorted. Lol, the dollar, which is There is nothing more unstable than people. You are evidence enough of that. Over the lifespan of Bitcoin, its value has increased by 999999999%, and over the last year has tanked by ~65%. In the same timespan, the USD has remained within 10%. Just stop, brah. |
|
|
|
If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.
Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.
And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.
Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor? ... Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth. Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again? You are missing it entirely again little lamby. The SoV isn't so much the feature that benefits here, so much as the existential stability of the money and not having the Argentine Peso yanked out from under them. Wait, "existential stability" of Bitcoin, the most unstable thing calling itself a "currency" in the history of the world?!  You have something more stable than math? What, gold? Bitcoin relies on math. So do banks. So do random number generators. So do shitcoins. If you seriously need examples of things more stable than Bitcoin, there's the dollar. And the peso, for that matter |
|
|
|
If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.
Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.
And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.
Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor? ... Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth. Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again? You are missing it entirely again little lamby. The SoV isn't so much the feature that benefits here, so much as the existential stability of the money and not having the Argentine Peso yanked out from under them. Wait, "existential stability" of Bitcoin, the most unstable thing calling itself a "currency" in the history of the world?! |
|
|
|
...
This is where I am working to change this. I'm not giving bitcoins to the poor. I'm teaching them how to secure Bitcoins.
And I'm teaching them how to secure their mansions & yachts. Must be a busy time for you teaching "the poor" how to secure their mansions and yachts? Well, technically I'm using testnet coins. But I like the idea of mansions and yachts. I will get miniature models as prizes for understanding. You have the third-world poor transacting on the testnet?  |
|
|
|
If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.
Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.
And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.
Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor? ... Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth. Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again? |
|
|
|
...
Must be a busy time for you teaching "the poor" how to secure their mansions and yachts?
I stay about as busy as cbeast does  |
|
|
|
... He's continuing to incest, just like we suggested. ...
A furry suggesting insest? How sick are you people?!  |
|
|
|
...
This is where I am working to change this. I'm not giving bitcoins to the poor. I'm teaching them how to secure Bitcoins.
And I'm teaching them how to secure their mansions & yachts. |
|
|
|
... if the government did not provide national security then the counrty would be vulnerable to invasion,...
Not necessarily. One could imagine a collection of competing defense contractors interacting with insurance companies to provide very efficient defense services to a significant number of high-profile clients... Multiple competing armies bidding for defence contracts. You guys eat a lot of wall candy when you were little?  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
