education is at fault.
many people feel that 'cheap' means bad value. or something wrong with it.
they think if something is expensive then it must have more value.
i see it all the time.
take concert tickets and merchandise. its easy to buy a ticket/official shirt direct from the venue early cheaply. same with the merch'.. yet i see silly people proud of the fact that they paid a premium for a ticket because they were buying the 'last few tickets available' so they deem those tickets to be worth more and something proud to have paid more for. even if that same ticket was being sold at a 3rd of the price the month before.
i have even had conversations with people sat on same row as me showing off that they paid 3x more for a seat that should have cost the same as mine.. they think they are more worthy of the seat by paying more.
same seat, same view, same entertainment. nothing has changed but the price
.. its silly but hey.. its what they were taught to think
yes if they were offered the same ticket a month before they may not have taken it. but suddenly when they see demand is high they suddenly want it more.
they have all been educated to not want things cheap and widely available and only want things when they are premium and when they think they are missing out.
I know exactly what you mean. I have witnessed this on several occasions. Although, I am not so sure that it is due to "education", but rather I think it's some sort of a psychological effect. Years ago I had an accountant tell me about this effect. He gave me the example of the price and sales of computers. Or, at least how it was back in the 70's and 80's. He mentioned how when the PCs were introduced they were at a cheap price, but they didn't sell very well, as time went by their prices rose and it was when they got over $300 did they start selling like crazy, even though they were the same model of computer. I have seen a similar effect with bitcoin. Years ago, 2012, 2013, I was telling all who I knew about this new technology, and that they should probably buy into it, even $100 worth. Except for two friends, I just got funny looks or laughter. But now, in these past 2 years, bitcoin's price rose to near 70k, and now that it's at 30k, I get about half those people calling me and asking how to buy bitcoin. ... The other half either rarely look me in the eye, or are pissed off at me about something. |
|
|
|
Funny thing that I've noticed. People who start these troll threads are always newbies who make accounts here just for the purpose of being fed.
Trying to change the mind of someone who came here to defend his statement until the very end, against all arguments, is a waste of time.
Don't wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.
That's a good one. In other words, as another saying would put it: "It is easy to wake someone who is sleeping, it is near impossible to wake someone who is pretending to sleep." |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a stock. It’s designed to be a medium of exchange. Just like a currency. When someone trades euros for dollars, is it „dumping of shares“ too? Ofc nah. It’s simply switching into a different medium of exchange. And just like you can’t pay with dollars in europe, you can’t pay with Bitcoin everywhere yet.
So the logical step is, to trade Bitcoin against whatever currency is accepted wherever you are, and then do the trade(if you’re trading with parties that don’t accept Bitcoin yet). But the more Bitcoin will be accepted, the less this will be necessary and you can use Bitcoin as a medium of exchange directly. Then there will be no more „dumping of shares“ and (spoiler alert) the system didn’t collapse. Or in simple words: magic myth numbers will allow for direct worldwide trade without intermediaries.
I don't really disagree with your overall points tadamichi, yet I am a little bit bothered if we end up locking ourselves too much into assertions that bitcoin is like a currency and not like a stock.. because in several ways, based on bitcoin's unique design aspects, bitcoin is like a lot of asset classes all at once. So, in that regard, bitcoin can be used like a currency, but there is already quite a bit of reluctance for bitcoin HODLers to use bitcoin like a currency in part based on the fact that it is the most sound of monies that the world has ever seen... so many people are going to become way more reluctant to spend it, when they may well have access to a lot of other monies that are less valuable and they can spend those less valuable monies (even assets) first. So in some sense, there seems to be a kind of current built-in incentive status, that bitcoin HODLers are less likely to spend their bitcoin until after such a point that they either run out of the other kinds of monies/assets or they are so damned overly allocated in bitcoin that they have no disincentive to spend it because they have too much of it anyhow. It can take a while for bitcoin HODLers to get to the point in which they feel that they are overly allocated in bitcoin, especially if they are receiving cashflow/value from other kinds of asset classes/currencies - so they may well be inclined to spend those lower value assets./currencies first. Personally, I don't have any real issues comparing bitcoin to stocks, even though it will tend towards a lot of misunderstandings if there are too many attempts to pigeonhole bitcoin into such a category - because in essence all stocks have a considerable amount of centralization, and so it could end up being way too misleading to be presuming bitcoin to be similar in those kinds of ways that HODLers/developers/miners have some kinds of control over bitcoin's issuance - and they do not.. it's almost as if Snowshow is wanting to imply that bitcoin has proof of stake attributions (similar to stocks) when it does not, so in that regard I agree with you tadamichi that getting too caught up in stock analogies will lead people to NOT understand the attributions of bitcoin very well. I completely agree with you Jay. My point of view was more of a long term outlook, in the case that Bitcoin becomes so dominant that hodling alone won’t bring gains anymore. Then i think the incentives change and it will be used as a currency. But we’re still far away from this point. I just brought this up, because it kinda defeats the ponzi narrative, if Bitcoin really was a ponzi, then why does it stop bringing gains once it’s used everywhere and you wouldn’t even need to convert it into other currencies. But it’s a win/win situation for us hodlers, because it serves us like a stock or safe haven, as long as the old broken system continues and in case Bitcoin wins we get an ultra sound money system and early investors got rewarded for making it happen(because they have stacked the most sats). What you guys are describing is just the S-curve of adoption. This is something that holds true for any new technology. Think of: electricity distribution, the light bulb, TV, the internet, cell phones, etc. They all went through the S-curve of adoption: at the introduction of a new technology very few will have it, or use it, but as time passes and if the technology is useful more people will have it and utilize it. But in the case of bitcoin it so happens that in the beginnings of its S-curve, it has a low price and then later in its S-curve it has a high price. Which is simply due to supply and demand. This allows for some who notice this to get in on an easy way to grow an investment. But, as you point out, towards the end of its S-curve, when bitcoin has spread as far as it can spread, its price will level out. A point will be reached where buyers and sellers are in a sort of balance. The price will still oscillate, but the large incremental rise over time will no longer exist. Of course, no one really knows when or at what price this will happen, at a million, at ten million, this is not possible to predict. I guess its just cool to see that others have noticed these obvious (maybe not so obvious to some, I'm looking at you Snowshow) properties of bitcoin. Sure exponential s-curve adoption based on Metcalfe's law and networking principles has been part of what tadamichi and I had been talking about, but it was not the only thing, because when you are an individual attempting to decide what you are going to do in terms of whether to invest into bitcoin and how much to invest, you may or may not be able to recognize or appreciate that exponential s-curve adoption exists where you might be on the timeline or even abilities to figure out your own financial and/or psychological circumstances. Even though you (arcmetal) acknowledge that there are ups and downs within the s-curve.. we still should acknowledge that those squiggly exponential lines are not guaranteed in terms of either how far they will go UPpity or how long it will take for the BTC price associated with the squigglies to get to whatever point that they are getting (and sure you acknowledged that part too). Lot's of normies (or bitcoin newbies) may well end up getting reckt as fuck, if they are not able to figure out some kind of reasonable and prudent strategy that fits for them, which many of us would theorize that kind of reckening to be difficult to achieve, even though we likely have witnessed some folks who end up achieving what seems to be an impossible task (getting reckt in a bull asset class like bitcoin).. and sure one of the fastest ways to get reckt is to use margin or leverage, but another way is merely trying to time the ups and downs of the market with a kind of hubris belief of knowing where the BTC price is going in the short-to-medium term.. which also may well end up causing both financial and/or psychological damages. Correct. Trying to come in now and make wealth based on trading on the little ups and downs off day to day ups and downs, is very difficult. It is not something I'd recommend to anyone. Unless you have at least a good system should one attempt that, but even then they can still get reckt as you say. This is opposed to the easier method, which is getting more difficult to do as time passes. ... That being, if a newbie had entered into the bitcoin system say ten years ago, they could have made 1,000 to 10,000 times their investment. But, getting in now they may see a 10 times, or waiting a little longer, a 100 times on their investment. ... If investing to make wealth is all they had in mind. But there are other newbies that can get in now that can do even better, without going down the path of investing. That is, they can take advantage of bitcoin's properties to make bank. For example, someone could start up a remittance business between the US and Colombia, or between the US and Thailand, or wherever. Or, they can get into any other number of businesses popping up. These are the ideas, the topics, that seem to elude the OP. And then there are the other opportunities that will eventually pop up in the future. There will be layers on top of the bitcoin system, things that no one has come up with yet. I recall using the internet back around the early 1990's when mosaic came out. I used to like using a web search utility called "webcrawler". It worked well, and I thought it was great and a useful idea to help me with my web searches. ... Then one day, during one of my computer classes back then, these two guys walked into the lecture hall and gave us a short preview of their new web search engine. I think they mentioned that they were from some university out east, or was it the west coast, hehe. They described a new algorithm for how to tie a search term to a page's contents. Then they showed us their webpage, it was a white blank page with just one entry box and couple of buttons. They called it "Google". ... When I went to the lab, I tried it, and I liked it because it had no clutter, no ads on the main page. I thought wow, what a great idea. No one really knows what's coming. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a stock. It’s designed to be a medium of exchange. Just like a currency. When someone trades euros for dollars, is it „dumping of shares“ too? Ofc nah. It’s simply switching into a different medium of exchange. And just like you can’t pay with dollars in europe, you can’t pay with Bitcoin everywhere yet.
So the logical step is, to trade Bitcoin against whatever currency is accepted wherever you are, and then do the trade(if you’re trading with parties that don’t accept Bitcoin yet). But the more Bitcoin will be accepted, the less this will be necessary and you can use Bitcoin as a medium of exchange directly. Then there will be no more „dumping of shares“ and (spoiler alert) the system didn’t collapse. Or in simple words: magic myth numbers will allow for direct worldwide trade without intermediaries.
I don't really disagree with your overall points tadamichi, yet I am a little bit bothered if we end up locking ourselves too much into assertions that bitcoin is like a currency and not like a stock.. because in several ways, based on bitcoin's unique design aspects, bitcoin is like a lot of asset classes all at once. So, in that regard, bitcoin can be used like a currency, but there is already quite a bit of reluctance for bitcoin HODLers to use bitcoin like a currency in part based on the fact that it is the most sound of monies that the world has ever seen... so many people are going to become way more reluctant to spend it, when they may well have access to a lot of other monies that are less valuable and they can spend those less valuable monies (even assets) first. So in some sense, there seems to be a kind of current built-in incentive status, that bitcoin HODLers are less likely to spend their bitcoin until after such a point that they either run out of the other kinds of monies/assets or they are so damned overly allocated in bitcoin that they have no disincentive to spend it because they have too much of it anyhow. It can take a while for bitcoin HODLers to get to the point in which they feel that they are overly allocated in bitcoin, especially if they are receiving cashflow/value from other kinds of asset classes/currencies - so they may well be inclined to spend those lower value assets./currencies first. Personally, I don't have any real issues comparing bitcoin to stocks, even though it will tend towards a lot of misunderstandings if there are too many attempts to pigeonhole bitcoin into such a category - because in essence all stocks have a considerable amount of centralization, and so it could end up being way too misleading to be presuming bitcoin to be similar in those kinds of ways that HODLers/developers/miners have some kinds of control over bitcoin's issuance - and they do not.. it's almost as if Snowshow is wanting to imply that bitcoin has proof of stake attributions (similar to stocks) when it does not, so in that regard I agree with you tadamichi that getting too caught up in stock analogies will lead people to NOT understand the attributions of bitcoin very well. I completely agree with you Jay. My point of view was more of a long term outlook, in the case that Bitcoin becomes so dominant that hodling alone won’t bring gains anymore. Then i think the incentives change and it will be used as a currency. But we’re still far away from this point. I just brought this up, because it kinda defeats the ponzi narrative, if Bitcoin really was a ponzi, then why does it stop bringing gains once it’s used everywhere and you wouldn’t even need to convert it into other currencies. But it’s a win/win situation for us hodlers, because it serves us like a stock or safe haven, as long as the old broken system continues and in case Bitcoin wins we get an ultra sound money system and early investors got rewarded for making it happen(because they have stacked the most sats). What you guys are describing is just the S-curve of adoption. This is something that holds true for any new technology. Think of: electricity distribution, the light bulb, TV, the internet, cell phones, etc. They all went through the S-curve of adoption: at the introduction of a new technology very few will have it, or use it, but as time passes and if the technology is useful more people will have it and utilize it. But in the case of bitcoin it so happens that in the beginnings of its S-curve, it has a low price and then later in its S-curve it has a high price. Which is simply due to supply and demand. This allows for some who notice this to get in on an easy way to grow an investment. But, as you point out, towards the end of its S-curve, when bitcoin has spread as far as it can spread, its price will level out. A point will be reached where buyers and sellers are in a sort of balance. The price will still oscillate, but the large incremental rise over time will no longer exist. Of course, no one really knows when or at what price this will happen, at a million, at ten million, this is not possible to predict. I guess its just cool to see that others have noticed these obvious (maybe not so obvious to some, I'm looking at you Snowshow) properties of bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Now there's a fine spike for pizza day.  |
|
|
|
You benefit from the economic resources that new investors are bringing into the scheme.
Products and raw materials. From them people benefit through consumption or building them into final products. And again, no new buyers, that is, investors, are required. That is what economic resources are. They are things that provide benefit to people without the need of new investors.
At this point I think you are trolling. Let us say I bought an entire Bitcoin, in a Peer to Peer manner. I gave them cash, they gave me Bitcoin. Why have I been fooled? Let us say I sold an entire Bitcoin, in a Peer to Peer manner. They gave me cash, I gave them Bitcoin. Why have they been fooled? Now onto the second quote. You are telling me purchasing a piece of metal from a hardware store is a scam because they swapped Dollars for that piece of metal and now they can only benefit from it by finding a new investor. What the heck? You can purchase a TON of goods DIRECTLY using Bitcoin. The company accepts Bitcoin, you get the goods. Corporations did this a while ago, some of them still do it. Steam did it. Microsoft did it. eBay is looking forward to doing it. These are all just names out of my short memory, there are many more. Look at El Salvador and tell me how this is a scam? If I purchase a t-shirt off eBay using Bitcoin DIRECTLY, where is this 'investor that needs to exist for me to benefit off my Bitcoin'? Answer is nowhere because, as I keep repeating, this is all just a fantasy of yours and nothing more. In this situation, most antrepreneurs are scammers. The local grocery store is scamming you because they can only benefit off their food by finding victims who voluntarily purchase from their store. Admit it. Your conspiracy theory is very flawed. - Regards, PrivacyG You ignored the entire point. So, I am going to make it easy for you by asking you one simple question: can anyone in the bitcoin scheme benefit from the scheme without new investors entering the scheme? Here is a take on "new investors" entering a "scheme", as you put it. Let's imagine we live on an island in the south pacific, that has not been discovered, maybe off the coast of the Pitcairn Islands. But now we have discovered the rest of the world, and so we wish to join their economy to get stuff we have never seen before. So apparently the rest of the world tells us on the island that we need "dollars". We wish to get a satellite phone, and a satellite connected computer, but first we need to get these newly discovered "dollars". We don't currently have "dollars", but we have lots of coconuts. We trade some of our coconuts for these "dollars". ... Now we can buy that new satellite phone. ... After trading our coconuts for "dollars", and trading our "dollars" for a new phone, guess what has happened? ... We have just entered this new "scheme" of "dollars" as a new "investor". (now just replace every word "dollar" in the comment above with the word "bitcoins", and you'll understand PrivacyG's comment) |
|
|
|
the victims are those that stay the longest in the scheme.
That doesn't sound right either. I've been in since 2013 and I'm doing just fine, thanks. And the people who got in before I did are doing even better. That's the complete and total opposite of what you're suggesting. It's been an incredibly shrewd investment for those who had the sense to get in early and also had the fortitude to stick around this long. Do you deliberately make your posts sound as though you haven't got the slightest clue what you're talking about? Or does it just come naturally? Do you have problems with understanding the word: 'ultimately"? Ultimately, in all schemes where no resources exist and the investors are able to benefit only through resources contributed from new investors, the victims are those who stay the longest in the scheme. That is by definition. The so called bitcoin holders, own no resources in the scheme, from which they could benefit within the scheme. So, ultimately they will be left holding the bag. I have stayed a long time, I think, since around 2011, and I don't feel bad about the bag I am holding. It does rather well for me. I suspect it'll keep doing well for me. ... The "resource" that you think does not exist, and that appears to elude and confound you is of bitcoin's "utility". Here are some examples: I have noticed how well others have done with their "bags", and here I mean the people on the bitcoin beach, in El Salvador, or the people in Venezuela, and how it has helped them survive the crushing inflation of their Bolivar. Or maybe for all of those that were paying high fees for remittances, that can now send bitcoin for pennies, or for a dollar depending on the fee. ... I even heard once that someone (laszlo on May 22, 2010) was able to get a couple of pizzas for some bitcoin. ... The list of these types of examples, of bitcoin's "utility", of how bitcoin is helping, appears to be growing all the time. I can tell that you have upgraded your arguments since the last time you were posting here, but these are still falling flat. It now seems that your catchphrase is that bitcoin is a "scam", but repeating this over and over without a realistic explanation is not going to convince anyone here. |
|
|
|
Swings like this make me chuckle. Whoever dumped is going to have a hard time buying back.  |
|
|
|
That's like in ponzi schemes. You cannot afect people by saying that no business exists behind the scheme, because people are driven by greed when they see others are making money from the scheme. When the scheme ends only then people realize that the business didn't exist. The same will happen in the Satoshi's scheme. When the scheme ends people will realize that bitcoin didn't exist.
Oh, now you are moving goal posts. First it does not exist at all. Then when you have been told it exists as a digital money and it has open source code where you can examine by your own eyes that how it operates and by what rules it operates, you decided that it has no value at all. And now that you have noticed that it does have a value to other people even if you don't value at all, you decide it is a ponzi scheme.  You're funny man. You just can't stand it that whatever you say or do, Bitcoin will keep running in the internet. And people keep using it as their investment, daily currency and a savings account. You need a therapist to help you. Because you will only get more and more angry and bitter while Bitcoin grows, gets used more, userbase grows and the price of Bitcoin grows. Help yourself and go see therapist. It seems that you have a problem of seeing things that don't exist in reality. I never said things that you put into my mouth. I sad that bitcoin doesn't exist in the Satoshi's scheme the same as a business doesn't exist in ponzi schemes. So you're either incapable of reading or comprehending a simple argument from analogy. Whatever is the case you have a problem of seeing things that don't actually exist. It is no wonder then that you're a fanatical bitcoin believer. All fanatics have problems with reality.If that ain't the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is. |
|
|
|
Everything digital is bunch of 1 and 0 located in a computer memory. But bitcoin is neither digital nor tangible given it's not real. So, just because bitcoin is not real that doesn't mean digital things don't exist. You have a very twisted way of thinking.
I (or should I say all of us here) have a very twisted way of thinking and your way of thinking is correct? That statement just speaks for itself... So in another words, a computer program does not exist because the only thing that exist are ones and zeroes in a computer memory. Am I right? Like I have said. You have a very twisted way of thinking. This response proved that also. Ones and zeros in a specific combination form computer programs. The same as ones and zeros attached to the addresses in the Satoshi's system form digital numbers. But there are no combinations of ones and zeros that would form a coin called bitcoin because coins are made of metal. There are also no combinations of ones and zeros that would form digital products called bitcoins because no address holder is capable to show such products. All they are able to show are digital numbers. So, your interpretation of my words is a twisted way of thinking. That's just getting silly there. ... So, if I have it straight, like slackovic noticed, you say that digital items exist because they are made of 1's and 0's, but bitcoin doesn't exist because they are digital ?? That kind of logic is not going to fly with anyone that can comprehend sentences with more than 3 words. So before, in this thread, the tactic was evasion and now we have moved onto Orwellian logic, you know the kind: "war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength". I was going to add some more commentary here, but that would just add fuel to the fire. Instead I'll recommend a good book on bitcoin: "Mastering Bitcoin: Programming the Open Blockchain", second edition, by Andreas M. Antonopoulos. This book contains a decent and thorough description of how bitcoin works. It would be good for you, for people, for newbies, that want to begin to understand the inner workings, "digital parts", of how bitcoin functions. This then provides some explanation for why it has spread so far, become so popular, and has a current value of $47,441. For something that "does not exist", it seems to have an interesting value to many. |
|
|
|
...
Or, like I already mentioned, and I repeat, it would seem you are actively ignoring these elements of bitcoin that I and others have passed along within this thread. You say that you only care about "facts and arguments", but you only seem to ignore "facts and arguments". It would seem that this is really your main dilemma.
Elements of bitcoin? First you must show bitcoin instead of refering to the system that just stores and protects numbers according to some cryptographic protocols. You must show the thing that a person supposedly bought in the quantity indicated by a number attached to their address. People are not buying nodes, blockchain, protocols or other elements of Satoshi's system. But supposedly some coins called Bitcoins. Where are they? So, show me bitcoin and not your opinion about me. Nobody cares about your opinions on forum users. These points of bitcoin have already been explained to you by other posts in this thread. If you ignore what they have said, and the basic points I have said, then the main topic becomes: "why are you ignoring these basic things". Look here, at what slackovic just said: Everything that you just said are things irrelevant for the facts I have presented here. The only thing you're supposed to do, if you're replying to my posts, is to prove the existence of Bitcoin. You are one of those who claim Bitcoin exists. Your colleagues tried to prove the existence of Bitcoin, but I refuted all their arguments. Then you came with opinions about me and false interpretation of one of my refutations. So there's no substance in your replies that I could address. I don't care about your magazines or opinions. I care only about facts and arguments.
Man, you just won't give up, will you? For the bold part, you refuted nothing. You are just saying that Bitcoin does not exist without proving anything. When someone asks you a question you don't have the answer to, you ignore that question or you state it has nothing to do with this thread.Do you not see him pointing to the same problem I am pointing to: " you ignore that question or ". Why would we be saying this? |
|
|
|
I just happened upon an article that answers the OP rather nicely: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/why-bitcoin-has-no-competitionFrom the article: Bitcoin’s job is simple. Follow the rules agreed upon by the network and keep going.
That’s it.
It does this job extremely well. Not even the most powerful government in the world has the power to change Bitcoin’s rules.
This, then, is Bitcoin’s key feature. The one thing that sets it apart from every single altcoin: Immutability.
... it then continues and explains how other alts lack the level of immutability which bitcoin seems to have. |
|
|
|
Well, you can talk about evasion all you like. It's just you opinion. Completely irrelevant for the topic at hand. And like I already said, I am presenting no arguments here, but only facts. I am also refuting your rationalizations for denying the facts.
It's not really an "opinion" if anyone can arrive at the same conclusion. It is literally on display for anyone to read in black and white within this thread. It does seem that you are misunderstanding some key elements of bitcoin and of digital technology in general, and maybe this is why you arrive at your odd conclusions. I am not really interested in going through what all of those key facets are, but here is recent article that hits upon those key aspects of what makes bitcoin work and give it value. It might help you some: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/why-bitcoin-has-no-competition. The only thing you're supposed to do, if you're replying to my posts, is to prove the existence of Bitcoin. You are one of those who claim Bitcoin exists. Your colleagues tried to prove the existence of Bitcoin, but I refuted all their arguments. Then you came with opinions about me and false interpretation of one of my refutations. So there's no substance in your replies that I could address. I don't care about your magazines or opinions. I care only about facts and arguments. Wo, that is a really bizarre comment, since the only things I have mentioned are the properties of bitcoin, the elements that you have missed, etc. These are also things that others have also posted in these comments. And, since you actively side step and ignore these elements of bitcoin I had to add about your constant evasion of these basic things, and so noticing this evasion is a big part of this thread. There seem to be too many elements that you are ignoring, I don't have time to go through all of them, I have other things to do, and this is why I passed along that article. If you'd read it you would learn some things that you are completely missing. Or, like I already mentioned, and I repeat, it would seem you are actively ignoring these elements of bitcoin that I and others have passed along within this thread. You say that you only care about "facts and arguments", but you only seem to ignore "facts and arguments". It would seem that this is really your main dilemma. |
|
|
|
Well, you can talk about evasion all you like. It's just you opinion. Completely irrelevant for the topic at hand. And like I already said, I am presenting no arguments here, but only facts. I am also refuting your rationalizations for denying the facts.
It's not really an "opinion" if anyone can arrive at the same conclusion. It is literally on display for anyone to read in black and white within this thread. It does seem that you are misunderstanding some key elements of bitcoin and of digital technology in general, and maybe this is why you arrive at your odd conclusions. I am not really interested in going through what all of those key facets are, but here is recent article that hits upon those key aspects of what makes bitcoin work and give it value. It might help you some: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/why-bitcoin-has-no-competition |
|
|
|
[snip] Here is a lesson for you: evasion The action of evading something. The avoiding of an argument, accusation, question, or the like, as by a subterfuge. Example: "their adroit evasion of almost all questions". This is a tactic you have used throughout this thread. Here is an example: Iron Fist asks, repeatedly: But I did not sell my address in the system. I still own the address.
To say "nothing" cannot be factually correct, because logic dictates that I obviously sold something. I owned "something" that, after the sale, I no longer own. I ask you again, what did I sell?
Here you evade, ignore, then finally give a nonsensical answer (more evasion). You asked what you own. You own an address. Like everyone that installed a wallet application. That's all that you own. Now, whatever playing with the numbers the system performs around your address doesn't make you an owner of something.
... and the following nonsensical answer completely misses the whole point of bitcoin, and how it works, that is, that it is able to make a digital unit unreproducible. This is something new in the information age. Among other things, this ability to make a digital unit uncopyable gave bitcoin its initial value (as opposed to other previous attempts at digital money). My answer to you is: nothing. You sold nothing. Take this analogy. I write down my name and "1 Zeus" next to it. I now have "something" associated with my name. I go to my neighbor, I exchange it for fiat currency (for $ 44k) by writing down his name and "1 Zeus", and by writing down my name and "0 Zeus" next to it. Now I don't have that "something" anymore. All I have left is just my name. By definition, this process is called sales. My question to you, what did I sell?
... and then there the other instance of evasion where you simply say I am not interested in your fantasies. Sorry. That is the biggest tell that you know you can't answer that question, because paying any attention to answering their question shows that you simply got it wrong. A "tell" is something that a person does to unknowingly indicate the strength of their hand or what one of their future actions might be. Why do you think that your interpretation of this discussion means anything? I don't care what you think about me. This is the discussion about the non-existence of bitcoin. This is just more evasion. ... It does seem that the repetition of evasion happens a lot in this thread. Delineating the evasion in your comments is not about "you". Evasion happens when it is difficult to hide from the obvious: that you have no argument, no concepts to stand on, then evasion is all that is left. |
|
|
|
It's a very sad situation when you don't realize that you're the one having problems. I have said to you multiple times that I am referring to entries next to addresses. These entries are what changes when people supposedly buy Bitcoin. I am simply telling you that these entries are fake because no THING with the quantities indicated with this entries exists in the possession of these "buyers".
And what you do? You completely ignore the entries, and keep talking about the code that manages the entries. If entry in my brokerage account says 100 TSLA, I don't care about the system that make this entry to appear on the screen. What I care are shares in the company. Company is the THING. That's what I buy, and not the brokerage system that manages data. So, whers the THING indicated with the entry 10 BTC people supposedly buy? That's of course a rhetorical question. No such THING exists in the Satoshi's system.
Me and 100 million other Bitcoin users are having problems? Apple CEO, Twitter founder, few presidents, governments, stock exchanges, investment banks, financial supervisors, brick and mortar banks, thousands of companies around the world... We don't realize we are having problems? Well lucky me that I met you!  I'm sure to tell everyone from now on that don't listen to those hundred of millions of people, companies, investors etc. and don't you dare to verify anything about Bitcoin from its source code because this one guy in the internet says they are all wrong and he knows the truth! Well, you're free to think or tell people whatever you want. But that won't make bitcoin to appear. Btw, here's a quick lesson for you: An argumentum ad populum is an argument, often emotionally laden, that claims a conclusion is true because most, all, or even an elite group people irrelevantly think, believe, or feel that it is. An argumentum ad crumenam argument, also known as an argument to the purse, is the informal fallacy of concluding that a statement is correct because the speaker is rich (or that a statement is incorrect because the speaker is poor). The appeal to wealth fallacy is committed by any argument that assumes that someone or something is better simply because they are wealthier or more expensive. Here is a lesson for you: evasion The action of evading something. The avoiding of an argument, accusation, question, or the like, as by a subterfuge. Example: "their adroit evasion of almost all questions". This is a tactic you have used throughout this thread. Here is an example: Iron Fist asks, repeatedly: But I did not sell my address in the system. I still own the address.
To say "nothing" cannot be factually correct, because logic dictates that I obviously sold something. I owned "something" that, after the sale, I no longer own. I ask you again, what did I sell?
Here you evade, ignore, then finally give a nonsensical answer (more evasion). You asked what you own. You own an address. Like everyone that installed a wallet application. That's all that you own. Now, whatever playing with the numbers the system performs around your address doesn't make you an owner of something.
... and the following nonsensical answer completely misses the whole point of bitcoin, and how it works, that is, that it is able to make a digital unit unreproducible. This is something new in the information age. Among other things, this ability to make a digital unit uncopyable gave bitcoin its initial value (as opposed to other previous attempts at digital money). My answer to you is: nothing. You sold nothing. Take this analogy. I write down my name and "1 Zeus" next to it. I now have "something" associated with my name. I go to my neighbor, I exchange it for fiat currency (for $ 44k) by writing down his name and "1 Zeus", and by writing down my name and "0 Zeus" next to it. Now I don't have that "something" anymore. All I have left is just my name. By definition, this process is called sales. My question to you, what did I sell?
... and then there the other instance of evasion where you simply say I am not interested in your fantasies. Sorry. That is the biggest tell that you know you can't answer that question, because paying any attention to answering their question shows that you simply got it wrong. A "tell" is something that a person does to unknowingly indicate the strength of their hand or what one of their future actions might be. |
|
|
|
Internet is computers and communication protocols. Those exist. Bitcoin is not "used" given it doesn't exist. Numbers are attached to address by Satoshi's system. Attaching numbers is a proof that numbers are attached. Attaching letters is proof that letters are attached. Attaching a picture to a email message is proof that a picture is attached. No bitcoins magically emerge by attaching one thing to another. You believe in some sort of alchemy. Try to use your brains for a second instead of repeating the same nonsense over and over again.
Your level of your ignorance is astounding.
The Internet exists. Okay, I agree. But does the DNS protocol exist? It is also just a collection of numbers attached to addresses by your definition. Denying the use of Bitcoin is the same as denying the use of DNS. Could you please show me the DNS? No? You can't see it, hear it, or touch it, yet it exists and billions of people use it every day. I think he will never admit that he is wrong about the fact that Bitcoin does not exist. He says that Internet is computers and communication protocols. OK, you can see and touch computers. But can you see and touch a communication protocol (like DNS in this example)? If you can't touch it, I guess it doesn't exist so I don't really know how does my computer know what web site to display when I enter bitcointalk.org into the address bar. It can even go further than proving the existence of DNS. How about proving that "numbers" are being added up inside a computer. Can you touch a number that is running around inside a computer? Since numbers aren't "real", and they are just an idea ... what then is happening inside of a computer's processor. It really is just low voltages being compared from one transistor to another, a 0 volt here, a 3 volt there. Those voltages aren't "numbers". This then suggests that nothing is happening inside of any computer, and therefore nothing with a computer is possible, let alone communication via an internet. Delusional minds derive delusional thoughts. Here a quote from Bill Murray seems appropriate: It's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person.
|
|
|
|
Just click ignore on the OP and move on.
This 'bitcoin is just a number' thing keeps coming up, and we keep responding to it.
It's probably just the same troll or couple of trolls who have no money or job or anything else, who will never be able to get anything never mind any crypto and just come here to ramble on.
That or conspiracy theory nutcase. Either way, just ignore them and they will go back to just sitting in their parents basement not bothering anyone.
-Dave
I was wrong when I said that bitcoin is a number. It's not. Number is a number, a mathematical abstraction represented with symbols(0-9). So it is impossible in principle for bitcoin to be a number. In this topic I realized that there's no such thing as bitcoin. When someone says that they bought bitcoin all they can show is change of symbols in their address. So, nothing was bought. Changing "0" into "1" is not a purchase of a thing. So, indeed, there's no such thing as bitcoin. There's only the system that changes and stores numbers next to virtual address. And a lot of misinformation. That's it. This is just silly modern philosophy nonsense. It is a form of Solipsism. From its wiki article: solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind.
Metaphysical solipsism ... metaphysical solipsists maintain that the self is the only existing reality and that all other realities, including the external world and other persons, are representations of that self, and have no independent existence.
And this part here suggest that it is possibly all just silly nonsense: Solipsism is not a falsifiable hypothesis as described by Karl Popper: there does not seem to be an imaginable disproof.
According to Popper: a hypothesis that cannot be falsified is not scientific, and a solipsist can observe "the success of sciences."
Being a part time artist myself I enjoy silly nonsense, and so, it is why I've continued reading this thread. But, the comment that DaveF posted, which I quoted above, is really the most pertinent comment in this whole thread. |
|
|
|
Yes, it's this guy called "Antithesis" who dislikes that we're dealing with a different kind of currency they disapprove of. They find it irrational as they say, to use Bitcoin, because there's only "faith" that some will accept it in the future while fiat is legally enforced (AKA "faith in the government"). It has been repeatedly told them that Bitcoin is meaningful, but they deny any opinion other than theirs. There's no reason for discussion. They didn't, don't and won't ever understand. This does remind of a quote I recently learned, which seems apropos here: It is easy to wake someone who is sleeping, but it's near impossible to awaken someone who is pretending to sleep.
|
|
|
|
Anyone with an objective eye will come to the same conclusion. You literally are buying a number. You are not buying equity, real estate, vechicles, software licences, debt... You just receive a number to your electronic address via Satoshi's messaging system. That's a fact so simple that even a child can understand it. What nobody can understand is why people are paying millions of dollars for receiving numbers. That's a mystery beyond human comprehension.
So you indirectly admit that you are the same person who already presented the same ideas some time ago - did you forget the password from that account or? Your theory might be interesting to the kids in kindergarten, for everyone else it's total nonsense - maybe one day you'll realize some things, and maybe not. ... They have already stated that they have zero comprehension of what is going with bitcoin here: ... You just receive a number to your electronic address via Satoshi's messaging system. That's a fact so simple that even a child can understand it. What nobody can understand is why people are paying millions of dollars for receiving numbers. That's a mystery beyond human comprehension.
Apparently, what this person has missed is that many do comprehend what is going on with bitcoin. This forum is filled with such people. I'd suggest, as have others, that for those who are new to bitcoin skip this thread and try better sources when first learning about bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
