Of course that "all trades can be smooth" since you are trading the ownership of nothing. 

Ponzi is also based on trust. So?

https://youtu.be/pSbSKGDypPY

The above video shows that by buying Bitcoin one is selling ownership of something and buying ownership of nothing. This is because Bitcoin is just a fancy name for changed digits, and the fact is that something cannot appear or disappear by changing digits. Since Bitcoin is the first time in human history that people voluntarily and massively give up something to become the owners of absolutely and literally nothing, this makes Bitcoin the most ridiculous invention ever made.

No, I am referring to the fact that for every dollar that is in circulation, there is a borrower who was issued a loan and used loan created dollars to get(borrow) goods and services from the general population. For that reason he is legally obligated - by the loan contract (backed by collateral), to return dollars back to the issuer (bank), and in the process have less purchasing power for goods and services. That is how he "returns" borrowed goods and services back to the general population. On the other hand, bitcoin miner used bitcoins to extract dollars, goods and services from the general population, but unlike borrower, he has no obligation to return goods and services back to the general population. Thus, unlike Dollar,  Bitcoin is not debt instrument that reduces purchasing power of borrowers through the banking system. Hence, in the first instance we have: 'borrowing goods and services from the general population - returning goods and services back to the general population', which is legitimate. In the second instance we have "extracting goods and services from the general population", which is a scam.  

Of course, but the bottom line is this. "Spreadsheet entries" in the form of Dollar or Euro are created for the borrowing of goods and services from the general population and returning them back later. On the other hand, "spreadsheet entries" in the form of Bitcoin and Crypto are created for extracting goods and services from the general population without returning them back later. And that's the difference between a legitimate business and a scam.

Ability to transfer something (money, bitcoin, text, picture or whatever) is indeed  - utility. But this ability belongs to the transferring system, and not to the thing that is transferred. Everything can be transferred via some transferring system but that doesn't mean everything has utility. Picture has utility because it is used by art lovers for the  fulfillment of their aesthetic senses. Car has utility because it is used for driving. Dollar has utility because it is used for borrowing goods and services from the general population and returning them back later. Hence, these items can be both - transferred and utilized. But bitcoin is just an empty spreadsheet entry, and as such it cannot be utilized by anyone anywhere, but only transferred.

Fiat currencies are debt based assets, i.e. products designed for people who want to consume goods and services today and return them in the future. These people are called borrowers. With newly produced fiat they have access to the pool of goods and services which gets filled via economic activity of the general population. But since borrowers have to repay their debt with salaries they received for their economic activity - their contribution to that pool of goods and services, this reduces their purchasing power, i.e. access to the pool. In this way they return goods and services back to the general population. All this is backed by collateral, and in case of borrowers default, their land, cars, houses and other property will end up in the pool of goods and services for the general population to buy with fiat that borrowers put into circulation. Now, are miners - those who put bitcoin into circulation, and in that way receive goods and services from the general population, obligated to return goods and services back to the general population? Obviously not.

So Bitcoin has nothing to do with fiat currencies. The latter are debt instruments. The former is scam designed to steal good and services from the general population.

Transaction is an instance of buying or selling something. Of course, the internet alone does not enable the buying or selling of something, but what that has to do with the topic at hand?

Can you please answer one simple question: how can you utilize bitcoin, or in other words, what can you do with Bitcoin besides transfer it to another person? When you answer it you will grasp the full stupidity of links you provided.

Monetary transactions are enabled by internet and miners equipment, not by Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a spreadsheet entry which has no utility. Egg and gold have utility because humans can consume them for fulfilling their needs. With spreadsheet entry, no human needs can be fulfilled.

But when one buys Bitcoin, one is not buying a specific amount of kwh of energy. If instead of Bitcoin, an egg would be a reward for generating a new block, your argument would sound like this: "mining cost equilibrium is the bottom line value of the egg". And this is obviously foolish.

Millions upon millions of men and women use gold daily to adorn their bodies. We all use electronics that have trace amounts of gold in them. Gold is used in dentistry, medicine, aerospace, and elsewhere. More than two-thirds of newly produced gold is utilized this way. Meaning, gold has utilization capacity and we can use gold to compare it with other goods or services. In that way we can determine whether gold is overpriced or underpriced. For example, we empirically know that a gram of gold has lower utilization capacity than a car, and higher utilization capacity than an egg. So if it is priced above a car, we would immediately know it is overpriced. If it is priced below an egg, we would immediately know it is underpriced. In short, things with utilization capacity are not scams.

There is one simple and quick way to determine that Bitcoin is scam, and that is: market price evaluation. In the case of legitimate market instruments, one can easily evaluate whether they are overpriced or underpriced in the market. However, in the case of Bitcoin this is impossible.

Examples:

If a bond with a face value of 1,000 dollars, a coupon of 5% and maturity in 2 years, is priced at 500 we immediately know it is underpriced. If priced at 2,000, we know it is overpriced. If an egg is priced the same as pizza we immediately know it is overpriced because these items are used for satisfying human needs and we empirically know that the utilization capacity of egg is lower that that of pizza. If a guy was granted a loan in the amount of 1000 units of fiat money and used only his Dacia Logan as collateral, but then he manages to buy a brand-new Bugatti Veyron for that money, we immediately know that one unit of his money was overpriced because the utilization capacity of Dacia Logan is lower than that of Bugatti Veyron. And finally, if the book value of a stock is 50 dollars we know that if it is priced at 10 it is underpriced, if priced at 1,000 it is overpriced.

As we can see, in all these examples we have objective, neutral and price independent factors that set up the level for determining whether something is overpriced or underpriced.

How can we do that for Bitcoin? What objective measurements set up the above mentioned level? How would we know if Bitcoin is underpriced or overpriced? Well, it is impossible to know this. Bitcoin is not a company, so it cannot be evaluated through book value or earnings. It is not a debt asset like bonds or fiat currencies, so it cannot be evaluated through face value or collateral. Bitcoin is not good or service, so it cannot be evaluated through utilization capacity. In short, it is impossible in principle to know whether Bitcoin is overpriced or underpriced. And that simply confirms the fact that there is nothing behind Bitcoin. There is no underlying value for evaluating the investment into Bitcoin.

This can be best seen through the comparison with fiat. Although, at first sight, it seems that fiat currencies have no underlying value, this is not true. Why? Well, because today's dollars or euros are debt based assets, i.e. they are products designed for people who want to consume goods and services today and return them in the future. These people are called borrowers. When the banks grant them loans, new dollars or euros are put into cirtualtion, which are then used  for access to the pool of goods and services that gets filled via economic activity of the general population. But since borrowers have to repay their debt with salaries they received for their economic activity - for their contribution to that pool of goods and services, this reduces their purchasing power, i.e. access to the pool. In this way they return goods and services back to the general population. All this is backed by collateral, and in case of borrowers default, their land, cars, houses and other property will end up in the pool of goods and services for the general population to buy with fiat that borrowers put into circulation. Now, are miners - those who put bitcoin into circulation, and in that way also receive goods and services from the general population, obligated to return goods and services back to the general population? No , they are not.  Is bitcoin backed by land, cars, houses and other property of Bitcoin miners? Obviously it is not. So fiat currencies are debt assets backed by collateral and this is their underlying value. Bitcoin on the other hand has no such value, and it is a scam - fake money/asset, designed to extract goods and services from the general population.


That is why one can invest into Bitcoin only on the basis of guesses, opinions, beliefs, or conjectures about its future value. These are then spread through advertisements and propaganda to attract new investors. And this is exactly how investment scams operate - in the absence of underlying value, all kinds of manipulative tactics are used to attract new investors.

Bitcoin is therefore a classical investment scam. It's just that it's well masked as a market instrument.

...was supposed to free us from them?

I hear people constantly say that the price of Bitcoin at 5,000 USD or 4,000 USD is "cheap". But, the initial price of Bitcoin was at 0.001 USD. At that time, Bitcoin had absolutely the same properties and function as it has today, which is a payment protocol and means of exchange. But in order to have that function today, one has to pay it 4,000 USD. Meaning, in order to get the same thing, a person has to pay 399 million percent more than what she or he paid in the past. How can a rational person call this "cheap"?! If someone would want to sell you iPhone 3 for 2,000,000,000 USD, would you call this "cheap"!? What is wrong with people today?

By what method did you determine that this is the time to buy if in the past the price of Bitcoin was at 0.001 USD, which is 99.99997 percent lower than current price?  

For every dollar that is in circulation there is a borrower who used these dollars to borrow goods and services from the general public which is why he is legally obligated by the loan contract (backed by collateral) to return dollars back to the issuer (bank), and in the process have less purchasing power for the goods and services. This is how he "returns" borrowed goods and services back to the general public. Now, tell me, which Bitcoin miner has the obligation to return goods and services back to the general public, he received from them when he released Bitcoins into the circulation?

Sure it does. My fy "feelings" about Bitcoin are expressed here: https://youtu.be/wQJCL4s2GH0

Usability is not transferability. When you transferred bitcoin to someone, all that has happened is change of ownership. Usability is utilization of the thing, not its transfer. For .e.g food is utilized by hungry people for the fulfillment of their hunger, dollars by people who were issued dollar loans for the fulfillment of their loan contracts, or picture by art lovers for the  fulfillment of their aesthetic senses. Bitcoin cannot be utilized - only transferred. But transferability in itself is useless - nearly everything that is in existence has the capacity to be transferred between people - from dirt to bitcoin.

It seems you don't actually know the meaning of the word "using". When one passes bitcoin from his address to another person's address, he is not using Bitcoin, but instead, he is transferring Bitcoin. Gold is for example "used" - by millions of women and men everyday to adorn their bodies. Cell phones are "used" - for calls or texting. Dollars are "used" - for settling loan debt. You don't need to sell gold, Dollars or cell phone to a greater fool to make money because these items are used for their inherent qualities, rather than for speculation only. Bitcoin on the other hand cannot be used by anybody anywhere since it is just a number associated with an address. That's why you can only transfer it to a greater fool for speculative purposes.