oh well
its a video for entertainment not education.

tldr
amir suggests in first 2/3rds of video all problems with bitcoin relate to gavins reign of 2011-2103(he wasnt really doing code in late 2013-2014 and left by spring 2014)
but look at the dates of all controversies. and all the altcoins where devs left bitcoin to do open projects after "core" came to power in 2014. yep research genesis dates and see when bitcoin walled it self up


i have been around for a few years, and alot of amirs narrative seems off.. seems to be the same warped narrative of a certain group of social queens on this forum. too close infact.
he did start to make more realistic points at about 36:24+ but the stuff he said in the first 3 quarters of the video relating to the days of 2012-2017 does not relate to actual history or the timeline of bitcoin

amir taaki fell off the bitcoin bandwaggon in the early years,
(he left in due to suspicious/huge loses in the intersango days of bitcoin december 2012)
and went total nomad libertairian for a few months to then start his  dark privacy stuff which moved onto monero(2014+)

so ACTUAL events
bitcoin did not have any real development controversies until ~2014+. by this point some devs were backing away from bitcoin development. including gavin and hearne.. but the remainers. like sipa, lukeJR (& the other blockstream founders)started to ramp up the moderation and control of bitcoin and started to get more corporate, founding blockstream and branding the reference client as 'core'.. getting corporate sponsorship which is where the controversies started and alot of devs moved onto other projects/altcoins, because any idea's or proposals that didnt fit the core roadmap got rejected
(yep research: check the genesis dates of ethereum, monero etc.. )
(hint: they didnt start in the 2011-2013 days between satoshi control vs core control. (aka the gavin days))

as  for amirs narrative
it seems he is now apparently weirdly trying to play finger pointing of opposite narratives to shift the blame of how bitcoin development moderation grew(reality: due to the core side stepping in, early 2014) .. EG amir said that gavin was the one that caused a oligarch of corporate control of bitcoin structure that moderated out certain ideas, open door strategy and devs..
first funny. gavin was at that point a volunteer unpaid dev
funny part is in 2013-14 gavin was getting less involved in bitcoin software(not more) and was slowly setting up his retirement exit of bitcoin because the core devs took over
the branding of core started in early 2014 where other devs started controlling the reference client

yep the core devs started raising the moderation policies in 2014. and iit was only after that, where all the controversies started.. where devs moved to altnets due to the closing off of access to proposing and commiting upgrades on bitcoin which didnt fit the core roadmap/agenda

its funny because it was Luke JR sipa and a few other core devs that resorted to moderation of development. yep Luke JR moderates the irc/mailing list and bips.  but amir wanted to push that blame onto gavin, who was in reality setpping back and not being involved as much..
and those same devs had the business sponsorship deals to code features businesses wanted...

amir appears to be trying to re-enter the elitism of bitcoin dev cliq by trying to reassociate himself into the main guys still in bitcoin core control by doing the social game of setting up narratives where his is bigging-up certain devs to sound loyal to, by shifting away their negative controversial impacts onto other devs that have since moved out of bitcoin. oh and yes it was lukr Jr that implemented the consensus bypass (mandatory)upgrade that blockstream sponsors of corporate services wanted implemented

funny part is the interviewer in the second half points out that sipa and luke Jr is part of the corporate structure(blockstream, chaincode laps)
and amir tries to brush off and not bite at that poke

during gavins reign of 2011-2014 there were not controversies.
yea gavin went off the rails after 2014 doing his sponsored public shinanigans for pay-days..which caused social drama.. but by that point he was an outsider

i can see why due to gavins retirement exit shinanigans AFTER he left bitcoin. that gavin would in amirs eyes seem like the perfect person to push all the core dev negatives at.. but still.. its not how things actually played out

seems amir is trying to spin the history into a different narrative but hasnt bothered to check the dates and actual changes since he in reality has not been involved in bitcoin properly since 2012

he tried to re-enter in 2014 with dark wallet but found that the core structure was not to his liking which is where he moved onto projects which eventually inspired monero

hmm in the first 2/3rd of video its more revealing how a certain group of social drama queens in this forum are sounding very close like amirs narrative echo chambers i guess because they are part of the monero loving privacy mindset.. it makes sense that they are following amirs silly version of events, or amir is following theirs(who knows which ones started the narrative. when its just a echo bouncing around their little group)

and i expect the certain group of people echo chambering amirs narrative to now post some boring insulting name calling social drama

to which ill say to them.. research history. via code, github stats, altcoin genesis dates, researching who moderates the bips, main development paths of bitcoin.. research topics of "core roadmap"..
and please dont just use quotes from buddies as proof.. thats just called 'confirmation bias, not evidence/proof. if you cant do research outside social drama quotes before trying to rebuttal my post. dont bother replying to my post

your social drama finger pointing of false narrative games is boring and useless

but thats the thing though

i love to waffle and have walls of text explanations.. but i found many people just dont bother reading unless they are spoon fed answers in small direct couple sentence length snippets

you presume that people will apply alot of commitment and time to really push through..

keep this one fact in mind
with inventions like google, youtube, and even this forums search box.. people can type in a question and hope to get an answer
but most of the time they are redirected to lengthy books, length videos . and waffly blogs.

so they come here and just ask "what is a blockchain"
now ask yourself how far into your website do users have to go just to get to the same basic understanding of the word blockchain as my elevator pitch describes
yep its not in the first 4 chapters

take most of the other posts.. they looked at it and liked the layout but didnt take time to read it all. they just congratulated your effort and moved on with their day. when people say 'i see you put alot of effort into it' thats positive spin of, "i see alot of writing"

i actually did push through. and read multiple pages
many many pages about money in general and banks and stuff.. and by the time you actually got to the point of bitcoin to describe bitcoin

it was just talking about the software and database running on computers
which you then contradict with notes saying the computers are not computers but specialist machines dedicated to single tasks
and then saying nodes,

then the software  saying how first you call it a database, then redefine it as a ledger then redefine it as a blockchain.. without going into why is a blockchain a blockchain

you talk about how the computers are over 100,00 ALL spread out over the world ALL storing all transactions.. etc

but then on next chapter you change the definition again..
you even add in the video. of AA saying about a node is a full node
or a fully validating node, then immediately then you go to the chapter about a full node..  and even then you take a extract of AA book about a full node being one that maintained a full blockchain.. which you contradict it, by saying that not all full nodes are fully validating archival nodes and some only store small amounts..
and then want to redefine a full node being a full blockchain node
and then you go and say the software thats not full blockchain nodes is light wallets.

to a newbie this is all just too confusing to be sent into a spin of redefining before even getting to the good bits
heck even you then take full node and redefine it again into full blockchain node vs light wallet

and by this point.. sooo many pages in..
you have not even got to what is an elevator pitch of what is a bitcoin(currency unit) or blockchain (the linked batches of transactions, boxed up and tied together by the box id's)

your whole journey has been to try to teach them the jargon by redefining the jargon but skipping passed how each part does its job

yep through out the multiple leaps of redefining software, node, full nodes, full blockchain node
no where did it really bother to say that each computer receives transactions in a certain format and needs to check they the data match all the rules and all the balances tally out and all the movements are properly signed
and then on receipt of a block, that the block contents tally up and meet the rules and such, and blah blah
and that the id's of transactions in the blocks are calculated together to match a header identity of the transactions(transaction merkle) and long side the id of the previous block, as well as some other data and reward and nonce/extranonce its then matches the latest solved ID of the latest block to make sure everything matches, checks out validates and fits all the rules to then declare that block as a confirmed acceptable block to add to the blockchain

yep by the time you have confused people with what jargon to use to describe the software, you didnt explain the security aspect of peoples value/coins.

you took it as a stepping stone approach in a marathon..telling people jargon term. before even trying to just explain what the stuff does on a basic level

it would be better to:
rather than run a marathon expecting readers to train and persevere
to instead split the parts out as separate choices of paths to begin from. starting at basic level . where by you explain the function first not the jargon. and then you can reference the other parts once you describe the function and then jargon when other parts become relevant to the description

think of having chapters not as mile stones of a single path.. but a map of road junctions which people can explore depending on their needs.

peopel that know nothing about bitcoin wont have the "commitment" to go on a multiple chapter adventure just to find out if they want to get into bitcoin

use bitesize snippet explanations
its like dating you do go on multiple dates just to work out if you want to get into a relationship..
most people can figure out if they want to go on future dates via the first few minutes of first date..

so try the speed dating intro. get to know bitcoin in a short time period. where you can then offer proper lengthier interactions as a second stage

8+ pages in and its still talking about nodes and numbers of nodes

usually newbies want the elevator pitch.. the 2 minute explanations..
in in basic normal common language, not jargon

imagine it like 3 chapters..
elementary school speak, highschool speak and university speak

that way people can learn at any level


RG
what is blockchain
"imagine payments like cheques, but the clearing houses are not owned by institutions. they batch up the transactions into blocks of transactions and chainlink the blocks together by including the previous blocks ID in the next block. hence blockchain. the ID's are created using 'mining' process"

what is mining
"mining is the use of energy and equipment to churn through difficult workload (complicated math) to find a difficult to find result which becomes the ID of the latest block.. which inside the block includes a reward for that work in the form of fresh 'bitcoin'"

what is a bitcoin
"a bitcoin is a allotment of 100,000,000 satoshis, a satoshi is the smallest unit of measure on the network. which people can assign to a recipient by spending i, if they themselves had some first to then make a transaction"

what is a transaction
"its the main mechanism that moves bitcoin/satoshi units around it includes the source of the units assigned to the person wishing to spend it. the destination they want it to go and a signature that proves they are authorised to move the units to the destination"

..
after you done the brief common speak descriptions of the main parts. then you can have a different chapter then then goes into finer details using more jargon based words

windfury. do some research and stop the personal insulting crap. i only insult you in response to your insults. the other topic that triggered you, didnt even mention your name,  it was a topic about a social group or loyalists that idiotically remain loyal to a false narrative

as an example of CSW loyalists

SO SOME RESEARCH.. READ A LIILT

oh and you and your buddies are not even core devs.. so why are you writing this topic to make it a new fake topic about devs..

a bull run is something that lasts more then 6 months
this is how the wall street defines it(along with some other parameters) because they invented the word

here is something you all need to learn

the ATH temporary events were just that.. BUBBLE events..
they pump and dump.

the reasons for each one is not a "story"

its actually infrustructure
tthe 2011 ATH was triggered by the mining change from CPU to GPU
where difficulty jumped thus mining cost jumped thus cost to get bitcoin jumped.
its logic. common sense

the 2013 was when ASICS took over

the 2017 event was when ASICS got more efficient

the 2021 event was when ASICS got even more efficient

at each of these triggers. speculation took over and pumped prices mega high as over reactions. hense the corrections after the bubble reached maximum inflation and burst

2011 $0.30->100x->$30->correct to-> $2.50
the cpu to GPU cost increase should have moved the price by a factor of 6 months of bull to 8x not 100x
losts of people over speculated an instant 100x cost increase. also added in some emotional pokes about silkroad, wiki and other uses to hype up the speculation to cause the bubble

the 2013 was a mix of things
bitcoins GPU mining caused a snowball effect to the market. to get price to $6 in 2012.. then the halving done its job to get to $15 (just over its 2x)
then new exchanges and services hyped up the market.
but the underlying value before the 2013 ATH had a 6x before ATH to its ultimate correction after the ATH

the 2016 halving done its job moving the underlying value of ~$350 to ~$700 (market prices were higher)

the 2017 before ATH and after ATH had a ~$700-$3500

the 2020 halving done its job of a 2x
rthe 2021 moved at a healthy 6x to the ATH and corrected due to better asics to a 3x correction back to good value

overall the 2020 pre ATH was a underlying value of ~7k(market price earing $10k at the time)
and after ATH corrected to underlying value ($15k) with market at ~$20k

..
DO NOT EVER trat ATL temporary events as a show of bull markets of value or long term stuff. because ATH moments dont last 6 months.
ATH moments are temporary unjustified bubble events. they are not based on prices that should sustain that high that early..
yes value underlying the market swill eventually surpass those points. but people need to stop confusing temporary bubble pump and dump events as actual bull markets of value indictor movements.

oh and please do some research on what the actual triggers of certain events are. even if the following speculation that over prices the triggers is speculation and hype

you will learn alot more that way

i do laugh when i see people shout russia/china when they think of "control".. funny part is those screaming russia/china. have never visited those places
even funnier is how its actually the USA that keep on using lots of controls.. yep look at the sanctions the USA create many times a decade on other countries/individuals.

by the way. unlike fox news reports... chinese government does not watch every transaction.. china is not a electronic currency under one wallet system.. yep go to any travel money business and ask for chinese currency and they will swap your dollar/euro/pound for yuan without asking you to register to a chinese app.. yep china use paper money
and if you do want to use a chinese electronic bank account. there is not just chinas government app.. there are dozens of banks/apps from lots of companies to choose from.  much the same as the US
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banks_in_China

as for thinking lots of countries never take bank notes out of circulation..
funny because when the UK changed from paper bank notes to plastic bank notes since the millenium. it was very easy to change  and take paper bank notes out of circulation
heck the UK is starting now on planning to change bank notes right now from the queens face to the kings face.. so money does go out of circulation more then you think

..
what will happen in a electronic only currency is to imagine low level accounts wallets with no KYC in CBDC like the 'top-up' cards/virtual visa debit cards you can get now. but they have low level limits on them.. and thats how people will pay for things without hassle of KYC in a CBDC wallet. by having a low level account with low limits that requires no KYC

CBDC have the same things as todays digital fiat

if you take off the tin foil hat and do research.. you will realise many many things

government employees do not watch, monitor or surveill every transaction both in current digital fiat, and in the draft/trialing CBDC

what occurs is governments create money. and then ration it out into commercial banks. asking commercial banks to monitor their customers and only report suspicious activity to government agencies

with the draft/trialing CBDC their main templates are a 3 level /versions of service.
if your only moving minimal amounts .. call it monthly wage amounts you get the low level wallet. that does not ask for KYC but does limit how much funds can be transfered in-out
above this threshold is another service people have to upgrade to to get more relaxed limits. if they supply basic KYC. where by those commercial banks then do log names and transfers. but only report basic info to authorities of suspicious transactions and only supply full trade/transfer history if the government agency hands the commercial bank(s) a court order requesting full customer info
then if you are a whale/high roller/wealthy. then you need to go through full KYC

the reason to pass info to government is similar to how all fiats have worked for years.

the only big fidderence between cbdc and fiat is that in a CBDC the user has to save their keys to authorise payments which is more secure than a debit card pin number, where instead of having to hand a retailer all your debit card details for them to 'pull' money out of your 'account' you sign/authorise to 'push' an allotment of your holdings to the retailer

the surveillance and stuff is still the same as fiat now. (once you take the tin foil hat off and realise how fiat works)
and yes even in china their way of banking is similar to that of UK/US. so dont learn how money works from fox news
....

i solved nothing

i just reminded people that its 5 year old drama that was non news then.. and non news now.

everyone already knows fox news reports are not actually news

ognasty..
its 5yr old news
yes it was tim drapped fooled by CSW

CSW wanted to fork BCH into BSV in early august declare it an ICO and get it listed on a proper public market, but he wanted to put it all into tim drappers name "to protect the anonymity of "..
the funny part is right up to the day of mid august 2017 (2 years after the whole faketoshi drama" tim drapper still beleived in CSW ..
it wasnt until the SEC pointed out a few things and pretty much showed drapper and CSW the exit that tim drapper finally jumped off the CSW bang wagon with in hours of the SEC meeting which awakened tim drapper to the realities of CSW scams and tricks

firstly

only your dozen idiot buddy group echo chamber the narrative you defend so much
even the core devs have stopped pushing your version of events and owned up to the actual contentious events

oh and that topic windfury is trying to mention but trying to be vague hoping no one reads it.. but just hint to it to spark more social drama

it didnt even mention anyone by name...
yet the obvious candidates to which a certain false narrative of an event elaborates too came out the woodwork knowing it was about them. because yep they know they are involved in the fake narrative
thus outting themselves

i feel your anger is that when your buddies do finally go against loyalty and finally go research the actual blokdata.. it means they have to break loyalties to you. and your angry your friends will slowly leave you alone.

that topic where i posted a comment. is not about segwit. i did not even mention the word segwit(YOU are now trying to make it about that)

the content and context was about a question concerning(not verbatim) how can idiots easily be fooled into believing a lie and then spend years defending and staying loyal to a buddy partner group that wants to continue the lie

so i used an example of when a similar social game was played

but by you and windfury getting so triggered.. seems to reveal more about your games than my comments point was even trying to reveal

especially how you dont want your stupidity mentioned in multiple topics, and you want it limited to one topic where you can hide your exposure. and try to deny you ever got debunked to hope you can keep your games alive

just get the hint. the blockchain immutable data is there, only your 12 buddy group are echo chambering that false narrative and you only want to listen to them as your defence and pretence that you feel it has not been debunked because your buddies have remained loyal

but here is the thing
THOUSANDS of people are not following your narrative
they know there was a hard fork they know it was not soft they know that there was controversy

so get over yourself. your buddy group loyalty is not your proof..
and thats the point
i dont need to rely on social drama convincing people. people just need to do their own research and read the block data i diont need to form buddy groups

first of all its fox news

second its about a non exciting 2017 event

third the event attendee got debunked within 2 days of the event 5 years ago

seems someone contacted fox to try to create new drama about old event knowing fox wont research if event was ever discussed or debunked before reporting on it

firstly.. bitcoin has been running constantly 24/7 for 13 years 9months

secondly Store of value does not need to function 24/7.. banks only operate during business hours. ATM's fail run out of money all the time..
banks have had many issues and outages..

as for me not having electric..
well ive never had a brownout-blackout and so not been affected. if i was id use my phone as that has a battery or id to a neighbour..

if you think gold "has to function" for trade 24/7 in your home.. you are not realising people do not trade gold in YOUR home. they trade it in multiple places... same goes for bitcoin.

my home internet has nothing to do with bitcoins store of value.

for there to a a global electric and internet switch off/blackout.. i dont think people would be caring much about bitcoin. they would be more worried about the nuclear bombs or the asteroids that went off to cause such a mega electromagnetic pulse..

so although you want to cry about catastrophe level things. your just fantasizing.

if you want to talk about local problems. there are solutions

heck if there was a electric blackout of just a town level.. well banks and retailers of fiat will have the same problem.
pawn brokers wont be able to open their time release vaults to get to their gold. so gold trades would be hit too

i could go on but i thought it was all common sense and didnt need explaining..

https://twitter.com/TimDraper/status/901202875862237184

if anyone wants to forward the TD tweet link to all the media and foxbusiness.. as this nonsense is trying to spread.. please do forward it to quash the nonsense

fox news doing investigative reporting???
.. nah

gavin and many others all signed an NDA with a payday value included for the event involvement. im guessing breaching the NDA or coming clean came with a consequence/punishment clause


checking some notes of stuff i found over the years.. gavin didnt "talk" with... in a suggestive secret meeting. he done a public speaking engagement/presentation with government employees attending in the audience
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6652.msg251755#msg251755

yes satoshi heard about the CIA presentation invitation in april and it may have been one of his triggers to disappear and never come back. but other influences for the exit was that too many people treated satoshi like a central point decision maker. and also the wikileaks things. i feel satoshi disappeared for good for multiple reasons as he thought that bitcoin could and should continue without a central decision figure(point of failure)
as for thinking satoshi left due to hating what gavin done.. i doubt that because satoshi changed the privileges of the repo to put gavin in the lead maintainer spot when satoshi left, so it would be strange to give it over to a person you find as a attack vector (IE the reason you left)
so i think satoshi left for mostly other reasons

as for the gavin CSW fake proof drama..
gavin years prior said he was going to step away and retire within a few years (which aligned with the period he actually did start to back off from coding and maintaining btc). and so i feel he was just looking for a pay day to retire on in those last few years of 2015-17..
the same game as them unemployed family physicians that get paid to go on convention speaking tours where conspiracy nuts buy tickets.. stand on stage and say how covid was some alien robot programmed to kill. or the other conspiracy stories conspiracy nuts are willing to have repeated out loud by people that had a high reputation/accreditation earlier in life..
we all know gavin signed an NDA for CSW and got paid to turn up. so

basically he signed a contract to agree to  (my opinion->) say whatever CSW told him to say. or face having to repay the money if he breached the contract. hence no instant u-turn when faced with the debunk info

same money grab opportunity goes for his later attempts with BLOQ doing the alternate client releases that caused drama. (yep DCG owned bloq in 2016, before the whole gavin/jgarzik 2017 client variant)

so overall gavin was just money grabbing any money he could from any sources no matter the reactions those actions could cause to the community as a whole after performing the paid acts

EG in the 2015-16 REKT era gavin was speaking to companies like coinbase, xapo, bitpay(all DCG) about alternative scaling options via a bitcoin client that would upgrade the BTC network in a different direction than the core roadmap plan for BTC..in 2015-16
here he is talking at a coinbase(alsoDCG) about the scaling discussions he had with the big businesses
https://youtu.be/KUAXULUUBxA?t=283 which lead to the rekt capaigns

then we have the bloq(also DCG) varient in 2017

and the paid onstage speaking event at 2016 coindesks(also DCG) coinsensus conference where he again said he beleived CSW story
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2016/05/02/blockchain-tech-leaders-debate-satoshi-mystery-and-scaling-at-consensus-2016/

it seems that gavin was highly paid by CSW and DCG rather than some thoughts of a CIA payday and government force..
of course you could run down a rabbit whole thinking DCG is "government" or CSW is government..  but i think its just capitalism and monopolisation by big business and scammers with deep pockets filled by scammer partners, paying greedy people to cause some discourse/drama.. not government

my view of gavin is he gave up caring about coding bitcoin in 2014 and just wanted to go on a last ditch money grab from as many sources as possible in 2015-16 to retire on and not really think/care about the consequences of his reputation/words he got paid to do/say

its not about give up debunking him..
its not about not fighting his games

its about playing smarter

if we dont mention[full name]its hard for him to say his [full name] is being defamed

if we call a random 3letter moniker 'CSW' a fraud, scammer, idiot.. its then becomes his fault of then wanting to associate himself with this known scammer of 3 letters we talk about

yes anyone in 30 seconds can search and find the linkage.

but for [fullname] to do it. also means he then has to explain the context and the lengths of debunks we provide against CSW tactics. which he has to explain proves the linkage

thus he cant/ wont try to sue people as easily

..
there are many many ways we can debunk him. and promote the debunks without promoting him and without falling into his SLAPP trap

its about doing things smarter.. out-game his game

greedy people are irrational. but if your willing to buy high sell low. you will lose and there is only so many times you can lose before your out of the game and not participating in the pump.. there are only so many idiot traders. and once they are out they are out.

then the pumps end and corrections begin. where only the smart traders are left

the NFT market is fake.. a huge majority of NFT are not true trades..
they are the creator selling to himself for a high price to fake high price to try to set precedent of expectation. so that when true buyers come along the true buy is suppose to also pay high/higher..
but remember if you create art. and put it into auction. and then you, wearing a different hat buy your own art.. that money as a buyer, returns to you. so it cost you nothing.. yet you manage to set a fake price..
so when a true buyer comes along to buy the art from you(wearing the hat) you are not losing anything from selling at a lower price that your fake trade before
but its this lower price that is actually the price discovery phase.. not the fake ones the creators are trying to promote

and thats the phase NFT are in . creators losing nothing because they are only selling to themselves...
then their next trade that appears to be a loss is the actual first true transaction of profit

its the 3rd transaction.. the duped buyer trying to sell.. that would be the true first losers.

this game used to happen alot in ebay when a new collectable british legal tender metal 50p piece was released. collectors buying them from the mint at 50p:50p would go to ebay and then sell it to themselves for £20(40x) to try to set precedent that these collectible 50p coins were actually worth 40x.. no one fell for that either.. apart from a couple idiots. so the trader again sells to himself for £10(20x) and then £5(10x) trying to fake price discovery until he can convince a true buyer of a price point they are willing to buy


those shouting "it will got to $20k, it will overtake BTC" are not wanna be buyers .. they are people already bought into ETH and wanting to pump it so they can exit at profit.. yes everyone wants a 5x but not willing to wait years for actual value(in deflationary currencies)..
so those buying in at $3.5k of a non deflationary. are just greedy and wanting quick pumps and dumps to exit ASAP, so they will shout out numbers like $20k. because thats their exit price the price they want other people to pump it to so the screamer can exit

yep.. in bitcoin those shouting $100k, $250k. are not shouting out the prices they are willing to buy in at.. they are shouting the Xx factor amount they personally want to exit at where they want to try to push others to buy in excessively too.. but as we seen.. it never reached $100k+ because yep there are real underlying cost windows involved that topped out at $70k last year


but again. if you look at the total users as a whole. there is a limit to any market where the overall top limit reaches a peak that even the dumbest yet-to-be buyer just gives up and says 'no, thats too high'
meaning the pumper loses..


wrong
even the dumbest yet to be buyer has his limits. and there are not an infinite amount of dumb buyers.. so there is always a market top. where dumb users dilute out until there are none left

there is always a point where the speculative bubble bursts

yes when something is new and misunderstood this bubble can be as much as 100x. but once those dumb people and pumpers lose, they dont play so risky next cycle/time.

you can see how that played out in bitcoin
first pump was .$0.30-$30 (100x) but that then corrected down to reasonable closer to value of $2.50
(that period was trigger of first GPU mining where people screamed 'costs and difficulty going to 100x') which sparked the speculative price jump in days. the actual difficulty didnt jump 100x in days so ofcourse the bubble diddt last that month..
it took another 12+ months for the actual cost/diff to jump to the 100x
which is why $30 did hit again until 2013

next cycle seen a jump of far less than 100x.
and latest one was less than 10x

it takes time to weed out the weak treaders that emotional trade. where only logical traders are left and then new traders follow the logical path as they learn from their peers bad experiences
.....
because as you say eth has no supply limit. it will take time for traders to realise the new cost change and then get hurt by speculative bubble pumps.. until they get into rational/logical  value:price trading range

but long story short.. dont expect ethereum to remain in the bubble speculative price range its in now of 20x+. it will shrink over time
...
i have to admit before the merge.. i personally thought traders were smarter and prepared before the merge for the impending cost reduction.. but it seems they will learn the hard slow way, and i didnt realise how many greedy idiots there were in ethereum.. oh well their loss. they will learn.. the signs and data and indicators were there..
they will an d have learned the hard way

fixed that for you

as for bitcoin
bitcoin does not ask for your name or if you are a terrorist
i challenge you to look at any transaction on the blockchain. any block header.. and show me where it includes peoples birth names/ geo location and what they are buying... hint: you wont find it

gold relies on vaults, pawnbrokers and gold merchants.
you do know that BUSINESSES that facilitate trade(of both gold and bitcoin) do ask for KYC. but the currency (bitcoin/gold) does not

bitcoin miners are self contained in their work. they are incentivised by block rewards mainly. they are not reliant on transactions. yep they can make blocks without any transactions in it and still get their reward.

bitcoin users storing bitcoin. need to do nothing. but keep their private key safe. they can go years without looking on the internet and know their private key will still work where they can spend their funds later
they do not need to be online 24/7 just to keep their funds safe

trying to keep gold safe is more intensive and requires more effort.

oh .. and also think about the logistics involved and the costs to move gold cross the planet within 10 minutes..

yes gold has utility in local hand to hand transactions.. but when it comes to international transactions. gold fails the utility tests

though he is a fraudster.. we should not give him more name recognitions and publicity

we should be letting his full name not hit news paper headlines.

we should however get people to learn how to do basic research and due diligence

then as 'anotheralt' just learned in 30 seconds, figures out that a certain person is a fraud

however spamming his full name everywhere doesnt help the fight against him. its actually publicises him, which is something he wants.. he wants to be known as a scam king, the guy that can steal and fake collateral and not be criminally punished. because thats HIS recruitment advert of grabbing onto more greedy idiots into his game

if we teach people to do research, due diligence and not trust strangers, or people due to just name recognition.. it helps people out more in the long term than just faming up one guy that wants fame

its the old saying .. "give a man a phish or teach a man to watch out for and catch a phish"

since when is FIAT stable

car fuel costs have increased by 50% and then corrected buy 15%
the dollar to british pound moved 9% in a fortnight

electricity prices have doubled in some area's

instead of thinking crypto should be stable. people need to realise that FIAT has never been stable

people have just got used to price changes of goods in fiat.. being mascaraeded  as "seasonal premiums(near christmas high prices) and then the "sale/discount periods