The data is stored on thousands of computers around the world. These are the nodes. You can set up a node as well and store it.

I don't think it's false morality, but rather a pragmatic issue. Prostitution and gambling have existed since time immemorial and if you prohibit them what you are doing is putting the people who frequent those worlds in even more danger. Look at what happened with Prohibition. If you are a secular state it is better to offer a legal framework, and collect taxes, otherwise these businesses are run by mafias who will not pay taxes.

What is better? That gambling and prostitution be controlled by the government and controlled by the mafias?

For me the decision is clear.

In an ideal world nobody would gamble, or prostitute themselves, or take drugs, or play sports, or read books... but we are in the real world.

That's what I was thinking. I don't see much logic to the argument that the Bitcoin price goes down because inflation goes up. Unless at the onset of inflation it causes a short term drop but in the long term people take refuge in Bitcoin. Something similar to what happened in 2020 from March onwards, that in the face of the crisis there was a massive sell-off in search of liquidity, but then the price went up.


Lol.

I'm an optimist too, and since I'm going long term, I don't care much about this sideways. What I do wonder is what would happen if for whatever reason the price goes below $20K. It would be breaking a historical trend, and there some predictive models would have to be rethought.

In any case, I don't think it will happen. I also think we've already hit the bottom and when the price goes up and breaks $40K again, we're going to $100K easy.

I see you are going off on a tangent again. I think it is obvious that I was not saying that in the USA there is collective ownership of the means of production. Obviously not. Nor central planning of the economy, etc.


No, no straw man. I had misunderstood you.


This makes it clear to me.


Also clear now.

I have to say that I play a bit of devil's advocate since in principle if we take into account the classical Marxism, there would be no Marxism in the USA. That is why I have not taken sides with the author in the OP and simply asked what people thought.

From the quoted excerpt, I assume that in the book what he will develop is that classical Marxism evolved and now presents itself with other faces that are present in the USA.

That's what I thought. Even if many of us don't care what Musk does or doesn't do, as has been discussed in the thread, there is no doubt that he still has the ability to influence the price, especially in weak hands. The event may add volatility to the price.

I'm going to remind you of something you already know even when you say that: it's not free. If you live in the UK, they will be deducting a percentage of your salary to pay for health care, as it is done in all countries.

Calling it free healthcare is misleading. Another thing is that I agree more with a system like the UK NHS than with the US system.


We discussed this at one time, and it is not very explainable that there was a huge spike for a disease with such a low mortality. Before vaccines started to be given, it already dropped, in summer 2020. Here I think other factors came into play.

This is a fallacy. Apply it now:

a) “Central planning” is central planning; “class struggle” is class struggle; “Collective ownership of means of production” is Collective ownership of means of production or
b) “Central planning” is Marxism!!!; “class struggle”” is Marxism!!!; “Collective ownership of means of production” is Marxism!!!.

All this you say without having read more than an excerpt of what he says, because the book is published today, and may be more developed arguments in it.


Yeah, kind of like accusing someone of being "right-wing-nut" for saying that COVID-19 originated in a lab, and "racist" or "white supremacist" for saying that you don't sympathize with the BLM movement, even though your wife is black.

Do you really think the word Marxism is new?


Can you explain this? I don't get it.

In case anyone doesn't want to or can't watch the video, the girl says that most of the attacks vs Asians came from blacks. Something that has not been highlighted in the media. If most attacks had been from white men wearing Trump T-shirts, we would have seen it emphasized ad nauseam.

This also reminded me of a post by Vod:

Disgust with people of greed ignoring their duties

Who seemed to be very upset with the doormen who did not help the woman but said nothing about the beast that hit her:

I don't really know what it's all about but it sounds like a case that has affected you personally. I don't know if that is what has made you think of the lifetime cap but I don't see the point. The system is set up so that you give merit to deserving posts according to your rationale. I don't see a problem with LoyceV and fillippone sending a lot of merits to each other (if they have, I haven't checked), for example. Putting a cap would distort the system.

I love your ability to detect alts and cheaters. Has he been banned? At least yesterday he was not yet. When I read this post I smelled fishy: a newbie opening a thread to explain to other newbies how to behave well in the forum.  At the same time he was flattering the higher-ranked members to see if he could get some merit. And then some people tell me that by opening threads you are not more likely to get merits. This is what many of these newbies seem to think and I see that at least occasionally it works for them.

Going to the OP's question, I disagree. They are not plagiarism mistakes, they know what they are doing is wrong and they do it nonetheless..

I see you are mixing two terms, OP. The concept cryptocurrencies is much broader than Bitcoin, and you seem to be assimilating them. If you mean Bitcoin can replace fiat currencies:


It may not be today but I think that was the spirit when Satoshi created it as a 2P2 electronic cash system, another thing is that after years we realize that it is a much better store of value than cash.

To summarize, I believe that in the future Bitcoin will prevail as a store of value and will coexist with cryptocurrencies of Central Banks and the more useful shitcoins.

In the title you talk about cryptocurrency in general but then you talk about Bitcoin. As for Bitcoin do just buy and hold. It's not worth getting complicated with the most profitable asset of the last ten years. As for shitcoins, it surely makes more sense to trade but unless you have a lot of knowledge, as you may seem to have if you say you have been a trader, otherwise you are playing roulette.

I shave my armpits too, as I commented earlier in the thread. Weekly. What I'm not very clear about is the gender issue. That division between men and women sounds very heteropatriarchal.   

With this we can see how wonderful political systems like Cuba's, which are summarized in a tight state control that leads to misery everywhere. It's nothing we don't know about Cuba, but the demonstrations these days show that the situation is even more unsustainable and it has reached a point where people can't take it anymore.


What are you? A Venezuelan communist or what?

If they are going out on the streets, it is because they are not afraid of the consequences, because if they stand by and do nothing, they also risk dying. To risk that in a dictatorship they have to be very desperate.


You can see that they will be better off dying under the current regime, for sure.


You are one more example that between fascism and communism there is only a thin line.

No, BADecker's bullshit has nothing to do with what he says. What he says is that Marxism comes hidden under labels like "progressivism," "democratic socialism," "social activism," etc. It's something characteristic of the new left, to have moved from class struggle to things like feminism or ecology.

He is a lawyer who, among other things, works for FOX, which should come as no surprise. The weird thing would be if he had a show for CNN and said these things. I guess people who regularly watch Fox would agree with that.

I think you have to listen to Kiyosaki, because he knows what he is talking about, but you may not agree with him. He was already announcing the crash some time ago and when he did not come he said that he could not imagine the massive printing of central banks to avoid the crash. That he has changed his mind about Bitcoin is no reason to disqualify him. Many have, and welcome they are.

I think the crash is likely, but I have been hearing that there was going to be a crash equal to or worse than that of 2008 since 2012, and many years have passed without it happening. So I wouldn't bet on a crash happening within a year either.

That's what I think. And I think the trend will continue in the future. It is not a thing that makes me eat my head off whether I will be able to convert Bitcoin to fiat. For the time being I prefer to continue to accumulate it. Being the most profitable and scarce asset, I will worry about converting it to fiat in the future, if I do, as more and more people say that instead of selling their Bitcoin they will borrow against it.

Apart from what NeuroticFish has answered, which I think has answered well what you asked, I would like to clarify that Bitcoin taxes are already imposed in the vast majority of countries in the world if not all. So it is not a question of whether they will be imposed. What you have to do is to find out the legal regulation of the country where you live and act accordingly.

LOL!

The other day I was watching a Youtube video of Saylor, well actually I was listening to it because I was doing other things, and when I looked for a moment I saw the giveaway but I didn't realize at that moment that it was a scam. I came to think that Saylor was giving a real giveaway, facepalm. Thank goodness that for some reason, sending the Bitcoin yourself first didn't work for me. I didn't think much of it and went on about my business but now I see this post.