Bitcoin Doesn’t Exist, Or How Satoshi Nakamoto Tells Lies To People

[Antithesis]

It exists only in human mind, not in reality. In my mind I am the richest person in the world just like you are the owner of Bitcoins. In fantasy, everything is possible.

In my mind I have around 1500 BTC, but in reality I won't be accepted by the network if I told them so. So is it really in fantasy?

If a coffee shop give me coffee because I told them via Bitcoin software that quantity is money that doesn't make my statement true. Money is not quantity, but a thing measured with quantity.

Money is anything that is accepted by a community of people as a medium of exchange. Whether if it's physically (banknotes, coins) or digitally represented, in this case an immutable ledger, if some of us agree that it's useful, its units will start having value.

Number is an abstraction, it holds no value and it is impossible to compare it to the value of the coffee to find out whether the "exchange" is beneficial or not.

It depends on that number. If the number

• Cannot be erased no matter the excuse.
• Can only be transacted by the owner.
• Can be accessed by anyone in the world 24/7/365.

Then, I don't find any reasons why it shouldn't be valuated.

Bitcoin on the other hand doesn't exist and all you have is numbers. Numbers that express the ownership of nothing.

Just because it isn't used for expressing the ownership of governments' debts, doesn't mean that it can't.

Bravo! Money is anything. Any THING. And thing is something that exists in the real world independent of concepts created in the human mind. Numbers are concepts and they exist only in human mind. That's why they are not money. When I count existent things in my room, the concept that my mind creates from the process of counting is number. It's not money, but number. And as such it can be put on paper or digital medium. That what was put is not a thing with value but just an  auxiliary means to express the quantity of things in my room. Without the things, this number is referred to nothing. That's exactly the quantity in the blockchain next to your address - number referred to nothing. And nothing cannot be money.

[1714940306]

1714940306

[1714940306]

1714940306

[1714940306]

1714940306

[1714940306]

1714940306

[1714940306]

1714940306

[1714940306]

1714940306

[BlackHatCoiner]

I don't tend to just quote other people's messages as replies, but:

If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.

[Antithesis]

drop a bitcoin wallet address.

i will send you 10 bucks in bitcoin.  Money where my mouth is.  note.  it tends to move around since markets havnt yet come in to large scale agreement of what bitcoin is worth.  

Once you have that 10 bucks.  go buy a coffee with it and then tell me its not money.  

=>

drop a bitcoin wallet address.

i will send you 10 bucks in bitcoin.  Money where my mouth is.  note.  it tends to move around since markets havnt yet come in to large scale agreement of what bitcoin is worth.  

Once you have that 10 bucks.  go buy a coffee with it and then tell me its not money.  

=>

If a coffee shop give me coffee because I told them via Bitcoin software that quantity is money that doesn't make my statement true. Money is not quantity, but a thing measured with quantity. I could just as well go to a coffee shop, order a coffee and pay it by writing number 1 on a peace of paper. This won't make number "1" money, but coffee owner stupid. Number is an abstraction, it holds no value and it is impossible to compare it to the value of the coffee to find out whether the "exchange" is beneficial or not. So exchanging coffee or anything for numbers is stupid. You exchange them for things, existing things - other goods, debt (fiat money), services or labor. And you use numbers only to express the quantity of these existent things.

Your argument is so funny ...

So it is more valid if a government prints a number on a piece of paper and tells you what the value of that piece of paper is, because they determine that by printing more or less of that toilet paper money?

What happens if a software developer creates a software program or a application for your mobile phone? (Example : Apple Pay / debit/credit cards / Internet Banking / NFC payments / IMPS, NEFT, RTGS, IMPS)  .....all of these use digital "numbers" reflected of a centralized database to transfer value.)

You are such a Fiat sheep....     ....The world of payment systems and currencies are changing and people like you are clinging to the past.  

You are holding onto a "Titanic" that are sinking... and you are still singing and dancing and ignoring the tragedy that are happening with government controlled currencies.  

The government prints numbers on a peace of paper to measure debt. So I am not exchanging things for numbers but for debt ownership. I explained in the OP how this debt gets paid by the borrowers. In the past there was ownership of gold measured with numbers. Today it is the ownership of debt. Gold and debt exist. Debt is protected via collateral. That's why you need to whole banking system - the middleman, who will ensure the debt that you own gets paid. Bitcoin on the other hand doesn't exist and all you have is numbers. Numbers that express the ownership of nothing. That's why you don't need a middleman. You just transfer numbers and pretend they quantify imaginary thing that you call "bitcoin".

So your idea for a "perfect" currency is a currency that are based on debt? ===> https://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html

The imaginary "debt" that are being controlled or rather uncontrolled by corrupt governments around the world? You might be one of the lucky people who live in a first world country where the demise of fiat currencies are slowed down and manipulated by a very clever government... but for many people living in third world countries... that reality is already showing it's ugly face. (Hyperinflation -- Venezuela, Hungary, Zimbabwe, and Yugoslavia)

Satoshi Nakamoto created this technology to eliminate the corrupted "middleman" (Governments & Banks) and to stop the manipulation of the currency by replacing that with real "Supply and demand".

Why should people only have one currency? Why should the use of that currency be enforced with guns and violence? Why should a few elites determine the value of that currency? ====> Bitcoin was created to give people an alternative option and a choice if they wanted to use the Fiat currency or if they wanted to take the control of their own wealth and to use it as an alternative.  

I have no ideas. I am just stating the fact that quantity on paper bills or banking accounts quantifies debt ownership. Debt is not imaginary. It is created with every granted loan, paid with every loan repayment, and protected with collateral. And yes, in some countries the debt is bad, but that has nothing to do with non-existence of Bitcoin.

[KryptoKings]

Okay so Bitcoin is a data and nothing else according to op. So what? We are holding that data because it is valuable.
What is fiat? Just a piece of paper with some promisory note written on it?

[Aliceooo78]

If you go and ask an economist about the definition of currency, He will most likely tell you that the stuff issued by the "National Credit" endorsement is currency.
But that is the national legal tender, and history shows that currency appeared before the concept of "country".
So, what exactly is currency?
It's actually two words: consensus.
It is you, me and him, our common recognition and common understanding.
Bitcoin has global consensus.

[Antithesis]

Okay so Bitcoin is a data and nothing else according to op. So what? We are holding that data because it is valuable.
What is fiat? Just a piece of paper with some promisory note written on it?

Sure, true data has value. Fake data is worthless. Data in the blockchain is fake because it quantities nonexistent Bitcoins.

If you go and ask an economist about the definition of currency, He will most likely tell you that the stuff issued by the "National Credit" endorsement is currency.
But that is the national legal tender, and history shows that currency appeared before the concept of "country".
So, what exactly is currency?
It's actually two words: consensus.
It is you, me and him, our common recognition and common understanding.
Bitcoin has global consensus.

What exactly is a currency? A thing that exists in the real world independent of the concepts of the human mind. Bitcoin exists only as a concept in the human mind. So it cannot be a currency.

[Kakmakr]

drop a bitcoin wallet address.

i will send you 10 bucks in bitcoin.  Money where my mouth is.  note.  it tends to move around since markets havnt yet come in to large scale agreement of what bitcoin is worth.  

Once you have that 10 bucks.  go buy a coffee with it and then tell me its not money.  

=>

drop a bitcoin wallet address.

i will send you 10 bucks in bitcoin.  Money where my mouth is.  note.  it tends to move around since markets havnt yet come in to large scale agreement of what bitcoin is worth.  

Once you have that 10 bucks.  go buy a coffee with it and then tell me its not money.  

=>

If a coffee shop give me coffee because I told them via Bitcoin software that quantity is money that doesn't make my statement true. Money is not quantity, but a thing measured with quantity. I could just as well go to a coffee shop, order a coffee and pay it by writing number 1 on a peace of paper. This won't make number "1" money, but coffee owner stupid. Number is an abstraction, it holds no value and it is impossible to compare it to the value of the coffee to find out whether the "exchange" is beneficial or not. So exchanging coffee or anything for numbers is stupid. You exchange them for things, existing things - other goods, debt (fiat money), services or labor. And you use numbers only to express the quantity of these existent things.

Your argument is so funny ...

So it is more valid if a government prints a number on a piece of paper and tells you what the value of that piece of paper is, because they determine that by printing more or less of that toilet paper money?

What happens if a software developer creates a software program or a application for your mobile phone? (Example : Apple Pay / debit/credit cards / Internet Banking / NFC payments / IMPS, NEFT, RTGS, IMPS)  .....all of these use digital "numbers" reflected of a centralized database to transfer value.)

You are such a Fiat sheep....     ....The world of payment systems and currencies are changing and people like you are clinging to the past.  

You are holding onto a "Titanic" that are sinking... and you are still singing and dancing and ignoring the tragedy that are happening with government controlled currencies.  

The government prints numbers on a peace of paper to measure debt. So I am not exchanging things for numbers but for debt ownership. I explained in the OP how this debt gets paid by the borrowers. In the past there was ownership of gold measured with numbers. Today it is the ownership of debt. Gold and debt exist. Debt is protected via collateral. That's why you need to whole banking system - the middleman, who will ensure the debt that you own gets paid. Bitcoin on the other hand doesn't exist and all you have is numbers. Numbers that express the ownership of nothing. That's why you don't need a middleman. You just transfer numbers and pretend they quantify imaginary thing that you call "bitcoin".

So your idea for a "perfect" currency is a currency that are based on debt? ===> https://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html

The imaginary "debt" that are being controlled or rather uncontrolled by corrupt governments around the world? You might be one of the lucky people who live in a first world country where the demise of fiat currencies are slowed down and manipulated by a very clever government... but for many people living in third world countries... that reality is already showing it's ugly face. (Hyperinflation -- Venezuela, Hungary, Zimbabwe, and Yugoslavia)

Satoshi Nakamoto created this technology to eliminate the corrupted "middleman" (Governments & Banks) and to stop the manipulation of the currency by replacing that with real "Supply and demand".

Why should people only have one currency? Why should the use of that currency be enforced with guns and violence? Why should a few elites determine the value of that currency? ====> Bitcoin was created to give people an alternative option and a choice if they wanted to use the Fiat currency or if they wanted to take the control of their own wealth and to use it as an alternative.  

I have no ideas. I am just stating the fact that quantity on paper bills or banking accounts quantifies debt ownership. Debt is not imaginary. It is created with every granted loan, paid with every loan repayment, and protected with collateral. And yes, in some countries the debt is bad, but that has nothing to do with non-existence of Bitcoin.

It has a lot to do with Bitcoin, because YOU are using it as a comparison. Answer me this... Can computer code have value? (Let me answer for you, because I know you are cherry picking certain things in people's responses and you are just answering those... Yes, it can have a value, because we are paying for digital software like MS Windows or Office / Applications in Play Store etc.. etc.)

So if a well-known artists creates digital art work and he/she link that to a transferable Blockchain (Smart Contract) ...then people will pay for that art... because there are a demand for it.

So, Satoshi created a "digital" token that are limited and transferable, so people can take ownership of that digital token and it is displayed on a public ledger that are shared.

Soon Governments and Banks will have their own tokens & Blockchains ....and Fiat slaves like you, will once again be forced to use that. (Why is there not a global ban on Crypto currencies?.... because government and Banks want to develop their own) 

[Antithesis]

drop a bitcoin wallet address.

i will send you 10 bucks in bitcoin.  Money where my mouth is.  note.  it tends to move around since markets havnt yet come in to large scale agreement of what bitcoin is worth.  

Once you have that 10 bucks.  go buy a coffee with it and then tell me its not money.  

=>

drop a bitcoin wallet address.

i will send you 10 bucks in bitcoin.  Money where my mouth is.  note.  it tends to move around since markets havnt yet come in to large scale agreement of what bitcoin is worth.  

Once you have that 10 bucks.  go buy a coffee with it and then tell me its not money.  

=>

If a coffee shop give me coffee because I told them via Bitcoin software that quantity is money that doesn't make my statement true. Money is not quantity, but a thing measured with quantity. I could just as well go to a coffee shop, order a coffee and pay it by writing number 1 on a peace of paper. This won't make number "1" money, but coffee owner stupid. Number is an abstraction, it holds no value and it is impossible to compare it to the value of the coffee to find out whether the "exchange" is beneficial or not. So exchanging coffee or anything for numbers is stupid. You exchange them for things, existing things - other goods, debt (fiat money), services or labor. And you use numbers only to express the quantity of these existent things.

Your argument is so funny ...

So it is more valid if a government prints a number on a piece of paper and tells you what the value of that piece of paper is, because they determine that by printing more or less of that toilet paper money?

What happens if a software developer creates a software program or a application for your mobile phone? (Example : Apple Pay / debit/credit cards / Internet Banking / NFC payments / IMPS, NEFT, RTGS, IMPS)  .....all of these use digital "numbers" reflected of a centralized database to transfer value.)

You are such a Fiat sheep....     ....The world of payment systems and currencies are changing and people like you are clinging to the past.  

You are holding onto a "Titanic" that are sinking... and you are still singing and dancing and ignoring the tragedy that are happening with government controlled currencies.  

The government prints numbers on a peace of paper to measure debt. So I am not exchanging things for numbers but for debt ownership. I explained in the OP how this debt gets paid by the borrowers. In the past there was ownership of gold measured with numbers. Today it is the ownership of debt. Gold and debt exist. Debt is protected via collateral. That's why you need to whole banking system - the middleman, who will ensure the debt that you own gets paid. Bitcoin on the other hand doesn't exist and all you have is numbers. Numbers that express the ownership of nothing. That's why you don't need a middleman. You just transfer numbers and pretend they quantify imaginary thing that you call "bitcoin".

So your idea for a "perfect" currency is a currency that are based on debt? ===> https://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html

The imaginary "debt" that are being controlled or rather uncontrolled by corrupt governments around the world? You might be one of the lucky people who live in a first world country where the demise of fiat currencies are slowed down and manipulated by a very clever government... but for many people living in third world countries... that reality is already showing it's ugly face. (Hyperinflation -- Venezuela, Hungary, Zimbabwe, and Yugoslavia)

Satoshi Nakamoto created this technology to eliminate the corrupted "middleman" (Governments & Banks) and to stop the manipulation of the currency by replacing that with real "Supply and demand".

Why should people only have one currency? Why should the use of that currency be enforced with guns and violence? Why should a few elites determine the value of that currency? ====> Bitcoin was created to give people an alternative option and a choice if they wanted to use the Fiat currency or if they wanted to take the control of their own wealth and to use it as an alternative.  

I have no ideas. I am just stating the fact that quantity on paper bills or banking accounts quantifies debt ownership. Debt is not imaginary. It is created with every granted loan, paid with every loan repayment, and protected with collateral. And yes, in some countries the debt is bad, but that has nothing to do with non-existence of Bitcoin.

It has a lot to do with Bitcoin, because YOU are using it as a comparison. Answer me this... Can computer code have value? (Let me answer for you, because I know you are cherry picking certain things in people's responses and you are just answering those... Yes, it can have a value, because we are paying for digital software like MS Windows or Office / Applications in Play Store etc.. etc.)

So if a well-known artists creates digital art work and he/she link that to a transferable Blockchain (Smart Contract) ...then people will pay for that art... because there are a demand for it.

So, Satoshi created a "digital" token that are limited and transferable, so people can take ownership of that digital token and it is displayed on a public ledger that are shared.

Soon Governments and Banks will have their own tokens & Blockchains ....and Fiat slaves like you, will once again be forced to use that. (Why is there not a global ban on Crypto currencies?.... because government and Banks want to develop their own)  

Code is a set of program instructions that do something. Hence, code is something that exists. Numbers are human concepts that express the quantity of existent things. So you can say that you own 10 (quantity) MS Office programs. But quantity in itself is just an abstraction, mathematical concept of the human mind. In blockchain, you have numbers, but not the thing these numbers are supposed to quantify. The thing is nonexistent, and as such it is called bitcoin. P.S. nonexistent things have no value, not even zero. Dust particle has zero value, because it exists. Value is the property of existent things. The phrase "value of Bitcoin" or "Bitcoin has zero value" is an oxymoron given it gives the property of value to something that doesn't exist.

Satoshi created software via which he tells lies after POW: "go spend electricity, show the POW and my software will tell you that you own 50 peaces of a digital asset called bitcoin." That's a lie. No address holder owns digital asset. It only holds number next to its address. Number that quantifies nothing. And nothing is called "bitcoin".

Your prophecy on governments and banks I don't want to comment.

[NotATether]

Code is a set of program instructions that do something. Hence, code is something that exists. Numbers are human concepts that express the quantity of existent things. So you can say that you own 10 (quantity) MS Office programs. But quantity in itself is just an abstraction, mathematical concept of the human mind.

What if I told you that there is something backing those BTC numbers?

Just like there is a tangible item backing each MS office program (the license key), the item that backs the quantity of BTC is the transaction output.

Whereas you can get more than one copy of a MS office program in the activated state by possessing more than one key, by possessing more than one "mass" of BTC you get a transaction output in a different size.

Just as not all MS Office keys are created equally (those 10 keys might as well be for Personal, Business, Office 365 and Enterprise), neither are transaction outputs.

MS Office license keys (just a string of alphanumeric "codes") the "numbers" back the virtual tangible MS office "source code", the "program".

And similarly, the BTC "numbers" back the virtual tangible transaction outputs which are stored on the ledger.

Get it?

Hey, this could be a good guest post for Bitcoin Magazine, "Bitcoin exists; beyond the numbers on the balance".

[Nhazwrath]

I have personally called your bluff and put money on the line that Bitcoin is Nothing, by offering you that Nothing to Buy coffee with. 

Since you are currently refusing the bitcoin for coffee you are unserious in your arguments.  Any serious truth seeker would have taken the offer and opportunity to prove me wrong.

I know that I like proving people wrong.  =>

[Antithesis]

Code is a set of program instructions that do something. Hence, code is something that exists. Numbers are human concepts that express the quantity of existent things. So you can say that you own 10 (quantity) MS Office programs. But quantity in itself is just an abstraction, mathematical concept of the human mind.

What if I told you that there is something backing those BTC numbers?

Just like there is a tangible item backing each MS office program (the license key), the item that backs the quantity of BTC is the transaction output.

Whereas you can get more than one copy of a MS office program in the activated state by possessing more than one key, by possessing more than one "mass" of BTC you get a transaction output in a different size.

Just as not all MS Office keys are created equally (those 10 keys might as well be for Personal, Business, Office 365 and Enterprise), neither are transaction outputs.

MS Office license keys (just a string of alphanumeric "codes") the "numbers" back the virtual tangible MS office "source code", the "program".

And similarly, the BTC "numbers" back the virtual tangible transaction outputs which are stored on the ledger.

Get it?

Hey, this could be a good guest post for Bitcoin Magazine, "Bitcoin exists; beyond the numbers on the balance".

Ok, let me make this easier for you by asking you a question. If bitcoin is a thing that exists, then you don't need a new investor to voluntarily accept quantity next to your address in the exchange for his funds. Rather, you can benefit from the thing behind the quantity, which you claim exists. However, if Bitcoin doesn't exist then you are left only with quantity next to your address. Since quantity by itself is just a mathematical concept you are left with nothing. Now the question: can you benefit from the quantity next to your address without a new investor voluntarily accepting this quantity?

[Antithesis]

I have personally called your bluff and put money on the line that Bitcoin is Nothing, by offering you that Nothing to Buy coffee with.  

Since you are currently refusing the bitcoin for coffee you are unserious in your arguments.  Any serious truth seeker would have taken the offer and opportunity to prove me wrong.

I know that I like proving people wrong.  =>

Let's suppose I say to you: "give me your bike and I will say to you that you own 10 eggs". You accept the offer. You give me your bike and after that I say: "you now own 10 eggs." Was that market exchange or gift from your side? Well, the latter because I gave you nothing. I just said something. I made a statement. Now, what's the difference if I put my statement into a database as data, instead of name "eggs" I use name "bitcoin", I use software for making the statement and my name is Satoshi Nakamoto?

[Nhazwrath]

I have personally called your bluff and put money on the line that Bitcoin is Nothing, by offering you that Nothing to Buy coffee with.  

Since you are currently refusing the bitcoin for coffee you are unserious in your arguments.  Any serious truth seeker would have taken the offer and opportunity to prove me wrong.

I know that I like proving people wrong.  =>

Let's suppose I say to you: "give me your bike and I will say to you that you own 10 eggs". You accept the offer. You give me your bike and after that I say: "you now own 10 eggs." Was that market exchange or gift from your side? Well, the letter because I gave you nothing. I just said something. I made a statement. Now, what's the difference if I put my statement into a database as data, instead of name "eggs" I use name "bitcoin", I use software for making the statement and my name is Satoshi Nakamoto?

I don't see a wallet address where I can send Bitcoin.

Still not serious I see.

[Mistafreeze]

...

You could've saved us the stress and time by going straight to the point, writing a thousand words without concrete information is the same thing as spamming. It pains my eyes to come to the forum and start reading negative research about bitcoin and Satoshi. Bitcoin teaches us that scarcity gives value, the lesser people with bitcoin the better.

[Antithesis]

I have personally called your bluff and put money on the line that Bitcoin is Nothing, by offering you that Nothing to Buy coffee with.  

Since you are currently refusing the bitcoin for coffee you are unserious in your arguments.  Any serious truth seeker would have taken the offer and opportunity to prove me wrong.

I know that I like proving people wrong.  =>

Let's suppose I say to you: "give me your bike and I will say to you that you own 10 eggs". You accept the offer. You give me your bike and after that I say: "you now own 10 eggs." Was that market exchange or gift from your side? Well, the letter because I gave you nothing. I just said something. I made a statement. Now, what's the difference if I put my statement into a database as data, instead of name "eggs" I use name "bitcoin", I use software for making the statement and my name is Satoshi Nakamoto?

I don't see a wallet address where I can send Bitcoin.

Still not serious I see.

So there's an application called wallet, through which you wanna tell me that I own a specific quantity of Bitcoin. You wanna repeat Satoshi's lies. Ok. I want to tell you something as well. But, not by using fancy application. Instead, I am going to tell you directly: "Nhazwrath you now own 10 Ferraris". There you go. Via declaration I just made you the owner of a specific quantity of luxury sport cars. You see, I didn't even ask you to show me the POW like that guy Satoshi. That guy asks the POW from people and only then he is willing to declare them the owners of revolutionary digital asset via his software. I declared you the owner of luxury sport cars without the POW, without fancy application and without a software.

Now, how is the declaration that you read in your wallet different from declaration that you read here on forum? Both declarations have quantity and name and both are referred to you. And in both cases you are unable to show things which the declarations talk about. All you can show are declarations themselves. Nothing else. How naive you have to be to think that you own a thing just because someone said so by using fancy applications? And how naive you have to be to give up an actual ownership in the exchange for a declared one?

[Kakmakr]

Code is a set of program instructions that do something. Hence, code is something that exists. Numbers are human concepts that express the quantity of existent things. So you can say that you own 10 (quantity) MS Office programs. But quantity in itself is just an abstraction, mathematical concept of the human mind.

What if I told you that there is something backing those BTC numbers?

Just like there is a tangible item backing each MS office program (the license key), the item that backs the quantity of BTC is the transaction output.

Whereas you can get more than one copy of a MS office program in the activated state by possessing more than one key, by possessing more than one "mass" of BTC you get a transaction output in a different size.

Just as not all MS Office keys are created equally (those 10 keys might as well be for Personal, Business, Office 365 and Enterprise), neither are transaction outputs.

MS Office license keys (just a string of alphanumeric "codes") the "numbers" back the virtual tangible MS office "source code", the "program".

And similarly, the BTC "numbers" back the virtual tangible transaction outputs which are stored on the ledger.

Get it?

Hey, this could be a good guest post for Bitcoin Magazine, "Bitcoin exists; beyond the numbers on the balance".

Ok, let me make this easier for you by asking you a question. If bitcoin is a thing that exists, then you don't need a new investor to voluntarily accept quantity next to your address in the exchange for his funds. Rather, you can benefit from the thing behind the quantity, which you claim exists. However, if Bitcoin doesn't exist then you are left only with quantity next to your address. Since quantity by itself is just a mathematical concept you are left with nothing. Now the question: can you benefit from the quantity next to your address without a new investor voluntarily accepting this quantity?

You seem to get stuck on "quantity" for some reason and your definition of quantity and what other people's definition of quantity must be, is open for interpretation.    You are saying that "other code" like MS Office is different than Bitcoin, but the Bitcoin protocol are a combination of ideas and inputs from several Open source developers from all over the world ==> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/graphs/contributors

Bitcoin exist and you can physically see the lines of code and the output that it generates and the energy that it use and the nodes it is runs on... so your whole theory falls flat...when you actually know what you are talking about. It is as real as the numbers that are entered into a Bank account and/or Reserve Bank.... only difference is... one is backed by debt and the other by Supply and demand for a virtual token. 

[NotATether]

Well I always like a constructive debate.

If bitcoin is a thing that exists, then you don't need a new investor to voluntarily accept quantity next to your address in the exchange for his funds. Rather, you can benefit from the thing behind the quantity, which you claim exists. However, if Bitcoin doesn't exist then you are left only with quantity next to your address. Since quantity by itself is just a mathematical concept you are left with nothing.

Going back to your analogy about bitcoin and MS Office licenses, you are right that there is something behind the quantity of MS office licenses - the MS office programs.

In bitcoin you can't benefit from the transaction outputs behind the quantity of bitcoin. That's because MS office licenses are goods, and not financial assets.

Gold, cash, Tesla stock, futures, these are all financial assets because they are backed by something that doesn't have a tangible benefit to people (ownership of debt). Same reason why sneakers, phones etc. are not financial assets because there's no ownership of debt backing them, it's some physical benefit backing them.

Now let's prove that bitcoin does have an ownership of debt:

When some country mints new banknotes (the US did that in 2013 if my memory's correct), they must find something to back this quantity of banknotes. So they take a ton of foreign exchange reserves (such as cash or precious metals) and use that as the basis of the debt - ownership debt relative to these foreign assets.

In Bitcoin, the "foreign exchange reserves" are investors' fiat currency. So you can view the quantity of bitcoin backed by ownership of investors fiat reserves and this is precicesly why the price is able to go up and why it was originally zero: The more fiat that investors bring, the more reserves that can be repurposed as debt.

Combine that with the bitcoin supply being fixed, and you have a constant total quantity versus an ever increasing asset reserve.

Now the question: can you benefit from the quantity next to your address without a new investor voluntarily accepting this quantity?

You can't. That's precisely what my last two paragraphs were about.

[Antithesis]

Well I always like a constructive debate.

If bitcoin is a thing that exists, then you don't need a new investor to voluntarily accept quantity next to your address in the exchange for his funds. Rather, you can benefit from the thing behind the quantity, which you claim exists. However, if Bitcoin doesn't exist then you are left only with quantity next to your address. Since quantity by itself is just a mathematical concept you are left with nothing.

Going back to your analogy about bitcoin and MS Office licenses, you are right that there is something behind the quantity of MS office licenses - the MS office programs.

In bitcoin you can't benefit from the transaction outputs behind the quantity of bitcoin. That's because MS office licenses are goods, and not financial assets.

Gold, cash, Tesla stock, futures, these are all financial assets because they are backed by something that doesn't have a tangible benefit to people (ownership of debt). Same reason why sneakers, phones etc. are not financial assets because there's no ownership of debt backing them, it's some physical benefit backing them.

Now let's prove that bitcoin does have an ownership of debt:

When some country mints new banknotes (the US did that in 2013 if my memory's correct), they must find something to back this quantity of banknotes. So they take a ton of foreign exchange reserves (such as cash or precious metals) and use that as the basis of the debt - ownership debt relative to these foreign assets.

In Bitcoin, the "foreign exchange reserves" are investors' fiat currency. So you can view the quantity of bitcoin backed by ownership of investors fiat reserves and this is precicesly why the price is able to go up and why it was originally zero: The more fiat that investors bring, the more reserves that can be repurposed as debt.

Combine that with the bitcoin supply being fixed, and you have a constant total quantity versus an ever increasing asset reserve.

Now the question: can you benefit from the quantity next to your address without a new investor voluntarily accepting this quantity?

You can't. That's precisely what my last two paragraphs were about.

When we say "financial assets" what we actually mean is claims and liabilities. When you own goods, no subjects existe with the liability to provide you something nor you have claim towards the subject, because goods in themselves have tangible benefit. But when you own a financial asset, which have no tangible benefit, such subjects exist. And you own a claim towards them. In my OP I gave the examples of liabilities in the case of fiat, stocks or bonds and subjects (borrowers, company, bond issuer) that have these liabilities. In case of newly issued banknotes by the central banks, subjects are commercial banks or governments. That's because new banknotes are issued as loans to said subjects. So, the bases for financial assets are liabilities of actual subjects. And every holder of the financial assets has clam towards these subjects.

On the other hand, holders of blockchain quantities have no claims to actual subjects, given that no subjects with liabilities are created when new quantity is put into the blockchain. So no financial asset exists behind blockchain quantities. That's why without new investors voluntarily accepting the quantity, holders have nothing.

What you are actually saying is that my investment in blockchain quantity is backed by my own investment(my fiat reserves), which is obviously nonsensical. All that I and prior investors did, was paying off the existing members of blockchain. Our funds didn't end up as reserves for our blockchain quantities, but as spending of old investors.

[NotATether]

When we say "financial assets" what we actually mean is claims and liabilities. When you own goods, no subjects existe with the liability to provide you something nor you have claim towards the subject, because goods in themselves have tangible benefit. But when you own a financial asset, which have no tangible benefit, such subjects exist. And you own a claim towards them. In my OP I gave the examples of liabilities in the case of fiat, stocks or bonds and subjects (borrowers, company, bond issuer) that have these liabilities. In case of newly issued banknotes by the central banks, subjects are commercial banks or governments. That's because new banknotes are issued as loans to said subjects. So, the bases for financial assets are liabilities of actual subjects. And every holder of the financial assets has clam towards these subjects.

That's pretty much what I was talking about when I mentioned "ownership of debt".

On the other hand, holders of blockchain quantities have no claims to actual subjects, given that no subjects with liabilities exists when new quantity is put into the blockchain. So no financial asset exists behind blockchain quantities. That's why without new investors voluntarily accepting the quantity, holders have nothing.

In fact there are claims and liabilities. The owner of the private key for an address who sends bitcoin to another owner owns a "claim" of the BTC over the other person, who holds the "liability".

What you are actually saying is that my investment in blockchain quantity is backed by my own investment(my fiat reserves)

Yes.

...which is obviously nonsensical. All that I and prior investors did, was paying off the existing members of blockchain. Our funds didn't end up as reserves for our blockchain quantities, but as spending of old investors.

Even though the only thing happening was the nodes writing the transaction on the public ledger, that does not mean that funds are not moving around as reserves. Bitcoin completely abstracts this concept because its own protocol has no concept of financial reserves, which also happens to be the reason why random new cryptocurrencies have almost $0 market value when they are listed. It is the process of listing the cryptocurrency on an exchange that enables the exchanges themselves to attach their financial reserves (their own users' cash) onto bitcoin, hence why every exchange has a slightly different price.

This widget on Google that we call the "BTC price" is not an aggregation of all these prices, it is nothing more than Coinbase's BTC-to-USD ticker.

Spending of old investors' money, by itself, does not imply that those investors are not getting claims to their spent bitcoins (or liabilities for their bought bitcoins).

[Antithesis]

When we say "financial assets" what we actually mean is claims and liabilities. When you own goods, no subjects existe with the liability to provide you something nor you have claim towards the subject, because goods in themselves have tangible benefit. But when you own a financial asset, which have no tangible benefit, such subjects exist. And you own a claim towards them. In my OP I gave the examples of liabilities in the case of fiat, stocks or bonds and subjects (borrowers, company, bond issuer) that have these liabilities. In case of newly issued banknotes by the central banks, subjects are commercial banks or governments. That's because new banknotes are issued as loans to said subjects. So, the bases for financial assets are liabilities of actual subjects. And every holder of the financial assets has clam towards these subjects.

That's pretty much what I was talking about when I mentioned "ownership of debt".

On the other hand, holders of blockchain quantities have no claims to actual subjects, given that no subjects with liabilities exists when new quantity is put into the blockchain. So no financial asset exists behind blockchain quantities. That's why without new investors voluntarily accepting the quantity, holders have nothing.

In fact there are claims and liabilities. The owner of the private key for an address who sends bitcoin to another owner owns a "claim" of the BTC over the other person, who holds the "liability".

What you are actually saying is that my investment in blockchain quantity is backed by my own investment(my fiat reserves)

Yes.

...which is obviously nonsensical. All that I and prior investors did, was paying off the existing members of blockchain. Our funds didn't end up as reserves for our blockchain quantities, but as spending of old investors.

Even though the only thing happening was the nodes writing the transaction on the public ledger, that does not mean that funds are not moving around as reserves. Bitcoin completely abstracts this concept because its own protocol has no concept of financial reserves, which also happens to be the reason why random new cryptocurrencies have almost $0 market value when they are listed. It is the process of listing the cryptocurrency on an exchange that enables the exchanges themselves to attach their financial reserves (their own users' cash) onto bitcoin, hence why every exchange has a slightly different price.

This widget on Google that we call the "BTC price" is not an aggregation of all these prices, it is nothing more than Coinbase's BTC-to-USD ticker.

Spending of old investors' money, by itself, does not imply that those investors are not getting claims to their spent bitcoins (or liabilities for their bought bitcoins).

It seems you didn't get what the liabilities actually mean in financial assets. The absence of new investors is the best way to explain this. So, you have a stock and no new investor is willing to buy it from you. Does that mean you are left with nothing? No, because the company has the liability towards you and that liability is called equity. Equity is paid to you either as dividend or buyback and liquidation value. In bonds, it is the bond issuer who has the liability towards you and that liability is called principal. In fiat, borrowers and banks have the liability. Borrowers must use quantities that you hold to pay off the debt, which is why, they are forced to exchange their goods, services and labor with you. The banks must liquidate the loans with issued quantities, which is why in the case of borrowers default, banks have the liability to exchange foreclosed property of borrowers for your quantity. After all, deposits are explicitly stated in the balance sheets of the banks as liabilities.

So whatever your interpretation of claims and liabilities is, it is completely wrong. Because, in the absence of new investors no subjects exist that have the liability to provide something to the holders of blockchain quantities.