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

[Dabs]

I will not accept that you gave me 10 eggs if you didn't actually give me 10 eggs, nor will I accept that you gave me 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in my garage and I have possession of the key that turns them on.

If you say you give me 10 BTC or 10 bitcoins though, I will also not accept that you actually gave me 10 bitcoins until I see the quantity in my wallet, verified by miners. If it's nothing to you, I could care less, because to me, it is something.

But until I can verify in my address that I control, that I have the private keys to, that the transaction was confirmed in a block, then you did not send me any bitcoins.

At this point, it is irrelevant what the US dollar (or fiat) price is of those bitcoins. If a block explorer does not say I have it, you did not send it, then I don't have the bitcoins. If my wallet software (that does not look too fancy as I just use either Bitcoin Core or Electrum) does not indicate the addresses contain bitcoin, then you didn't send me any bitcoins.

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

[1713591165]

1713591165

[1713591165]

1713591165

[NotATether]

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.

Again, exchanges have the liability for you when you buy bitcoins from it. Exchanges are required to hold at least enough bitcoins in their systems to stay solvent, for their users to be able to withdraw (It's common sense, although there is yet to be legislation anywhere that enforces this). The ability to withdraw the bitcoins is how the liability is paid back to you.

It is worth noting that there is no concept of claims, liabilities, or reserves outside exchanges, at software and hardware wallets. This is what makes it a successful decentralized currency in the first place, because outside the exchanges there is no company or bond issuer or bank that can become insolvent and alter the value of a bitcoin.

Outside exchanges, bitcoin is not connected to any other currency's exchange rate.

Inside exchanges, it's connected to whatever exchange's currency rates it has.

Also inside the exchanges, the bitcoins inside exchange cold storage/hot wallets aren't connected to any exchange rate, because it only in the exchange software that connects to the bitcoins (however it represents them in its software) these rates. The exchange software is the one that enforces these rates, by sending or receiving the appropriate amount of cash from its bank & payment processor when a bitcoin withdrawal or deposit happens, respectively.

It also happens to be the way stock, bond and forex exchange software works as well. Even these assets can have different prices on different exchanges and it happens all the time.

So you want a real comparison to company equity and bond principal and not exchanges, OK. But it will be an apples to oranges comparison because bitcoin is a currency, not a stock, bond or loan.

You probably know that in bitcoin we have miners who extract a block reward that becomes increasingly smaller every 4 years. So the total supply of bitcoin that has currently been mined can be used as a statistic by which to calculate the bitcoin price. It cannot determine the price by itself. Just like equity, principal and how much your bank loaned you can't determine those prices as well (in the last case it would be the price of the debt should you want to sell it to a third party).

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

Finally, I got enough talking points to write my opinion piece. Now I can spend my time doing more productive things

[Antithesis]

I will not accept that you gave me 10 eggs if you didn't actually give me 10 eggs, nor will I accept that you gave me 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in my garage and I have possession of the key that turns them on.

If you say you give me 10 BTC or 10 bitcoins though, I will also not accept that you actually gave me 10 bitcoins until I see the quantity in my wallet, verified by miners. If it's nothing to you, I could care less, because to me, it is something.

But until I can verify in my address that I control, that I have the private keys to, that the transaction was confirmed in a block, then you did not send me any bitcoins.

At this point, it is irrelevant what the US dollar (or fiat) price is of those bitcoins. If a block explorer does not say I have it, you did not send it, then I don't have the bitcoins. If my wallet software (that does not look too fancy as I just use either Bitcoin Core or Electrum) does not indicate the addresses contain bitcoin, then you didn't send me any bitcoins.

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

Interesting. So, you will not accept my statement that you have 10 eggs if I didn't actually give you 10 eggs. You will not accept my statement that you have 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in your garage and you have possession of the key that turns them on. Nor will you accept my statement that you have 10 BTC if the quantity is not in your wallet. Ok. Then I have only one question for you: why then are you accepting Satoshi's statements that you have xx BTC if Satoshi never actually gave you BTC, but only quantity statement - "xx", and name "BTC"? Because quantity statement and name is something that you recieved from me as well: "10", "eggs", "10", "Ferraris", "10", "BTC". And I have no problem arranging for you to have them verified on the blockchain and to get you private keys and address that you control. If I arrange all that will you give me xx USD for the quantity statement on nonexistent Ferraris? If not, why are you giving xx USD for Satoshi's quantity statements on nonexistent BTC?

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.

Again, exchanges have the liability for you when you buy bitcoins from it. Exchanges are required to hold at least enough bitcoins in their systems to stay solvent, for their users to be able to withdraw (It's common sense, although there is yet to be legislation anywhere that enforces this). The ability to withdraw the bitcoins is how the liability is paid back to you.

It is worth noting that there is no concept of claims, liabilities, or reserves outside exchanges, at software and hardware wallets. This is what makes it a successful decentralized currency in the first place, because outside the exchanges there is no company or bond issuer or bank that can become insolvent and alter the value of a bitcoin.

Outside exchanges, bitcoin is not connected to any other currency's exchange rate.

Inside exchanges, it's connected to whatever exchange's currency rates it has.

Also inside the exchanges, the bitcoins inside exchange cold storage/hot wallets aren't connected to any exchange rate, because it only in the exchange software that connects to the bitcoins (however it represents them in its software) these rates. The exchange software is the one that enforces these rates, by sending or receiving the appropriate amount of cash from its bank & payment processor when a bitcoin withdrawal or deposit happens, respectively.

It also happens to be the way stock, bond and forex exchange software works as well. Even these assets can have different prices on different exchanges and it happens all the time.

So you want a real comparison to company equity and bond principal and not exchanges, OK. But it will be an apples to oranges comparison because bitcoin is a currency, not a stock, bond or loan.

You probably know that in bitcoin we have miners who extract a block reward that becomes increasingly smaller every 4 years. So the total supply of bitcoin that has currently been mined can be used as a statistic by which to calculate the bitcoin price. It cannot determine the price by itself. Just like equity, principal and how much your bank loaned you can't determine those prices as well (in the last case it would be the price of the debt should you want to sell it to a third party).

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

Finally, I got enough talking points to write my opinion piece. Now I can spend my time doing more productive things

The fact that exchanges have the liability towards you to transfer quantities to your wallet, has nothing to do with the fact that in the absence of new investors no subjects exist that have the liability to provide you something for these quantities.

Also, you keep talking about Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn't exist. Only fake quantities on Bitcoin exist. If Bitcoin would exist you would be able to show either tangible or intangible good that provides direct benefit, or financial instrument that have subject with the liability to provide you something for the quantity in your wallet.

[Lorence.xD]

Why the wall of text OP? You tryin' to be different from other people who spread FUD in this forum? Because this isn't the way that you should've worked because not everyone will have the patience to read your rhetoric or essay whatever you want to call it because it is a wall of text, try again next time. By the way, why do you believe in God when you can't see him/her but don't believe in bitcoin when there is a code that proves it's existence?

[Antithesis]

Why the wall of text OP? You tryin' to be different from other people who spread FUD in this forum? Because this isn't the way that you should've worked because not everyone will have the patience to read your rhetoric or essay whatever you want to call it because it is a wall of text, try again next time. By the way, why do you believe in God when you can't see him/her but don't believe in bitcoin when there is a code that proves it's existence?

I believe in God because I have evidences for God's existence. On the other hand, there aren't evidences for Bitcoin's existence. Only statements about its quantity that Satoshi's software puts in the blockchain. Statements aren't evidences, but products of human mind. Evidences exist outside of human mind.

Regarding the rest. I don't answer personal or non sequitur questions.

[Dabs]

I will not accept that you gave me 10 eggs if you didn't actually give me 10 eggs, nor will I accept that you gave me 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in my garage and I have possession of the key that turns them on.

If you say you give me 10 BTC or 10 bitcoins though, I will also not accept that you actually gave me 10 bitcoins until I see the quantity in my wallet, verified by miners. If it's nothing to you, I could care less, because to me, it is something.

But until I can verify in my address that I control, that I have the private keys to, that the transaction was confirmed in a block, then you did not send me any bitcoins.

At this point, it is irrelevant what the US dollar (or fiat) price is of those bitcoins. If a block explorer does not say I have it, you did not send it, then I don't have the bitcoins. If my wallet software (that does not look too fancy as I just use either Bitcoin Core or Electrum) does not indicate the addresses contain bitcoin, then you didn't send me any bitcoins.

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

Interesting. So, you will not accept my statement that you have 10 eggs if I didn't actually give you 10 eggs. You will not accept my statement that you have 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in your garage and you have possession of the key that turns them on. Nor will you accept my statement that you have 10 BTC if the quantity is not in your wallet. Ok. Then I have only one question for you: why then are you accepting Satoshi's statements that you have xx BTC if Satoshi never actually gave you BTC, but only quantity statement - "xx", and name "BTC"? Because quantity statement and name is something that you recieved from me as well: "10", "eggs", "10", "Ferraris", "10", "BTC". And I have no problem arranging for you to have them verified on the blockchain and to get you private keys and address that you control. If I arrange all that will you give me xx USD for the quantity statement on nonexistent Ferraris? If not, why are you giving xx USD for Satoshi's quantity statements on nonexistent BTC?

If you can give me 10 BTC or provide the private keys to the address that have them, and allow me to transfer it to my own address, then I will accept that you have given me 10 BTC, provided at least 1 confirmation or block of the transaction.

If you have no problem arranging for all that, then I accept you have given me the BTC. But you have not made any arrangements at all. There is an address in my profile, you can try sending there if you want to prove something. So far, there is not.

I have no interest in your Ferraris and I'm certainly not paying for them. If you give them to me, that's different.

You have not given me 10 BTC yet, so ... this is all pointless.

If you are merely talking semantics, it makes no difference to me whether it's a quantity statement of a supposedly non-existent Bitcoins. We all know it's control or access to the same quantities but everyone accepts it as just "you sent me bitcoin, or I paid you bitcoin" which can be easily confirmed, if you actually sent it.

So send or do not send, I don't care if you think it exists or it doesn't, if it shows up in my wallet and I can confirm it independently from you, together with all the thousand of other full nodes out there, then I will accept you sent me BTC. If it's on the blockchain, it exists on the blockchain.

Satoshi has been out of the picture for several years, you can leave him out of it.

Also, you keep talking about Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn't exist. Only fake quantities on Bitcoin exist. If Bitcoin would exist you would be able to show either tangible or intangible good that provides direct benefit, or financial instrument that have subject with the liability to provide you something for the quantity in your wallet.

You said you believe in God but you also sound like an atheist. That seems contradictory.

[Nhazwrath]

I will not accept that you gave me 10 eggs if you didn't actually give me 10 eggs, nor will I accept that you gave me 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in my garage and I have possession of the key that turns them on.

If you say you give me 10 BTC or 10 bitcoins though, I will also not accept that you actually gave me 10 bitcoins until I see the quantity in my wallet, verified by miners. If it's nothing to you, I could care less, because to me, it is something.

But until I can verify in my address that I control, that I have the private keys to, that the transaction was confirmed in a block, then you did not send me any bitcoins.

At this point, it is irrelevant what the US dollar (or fiat) price is of those bitcoins. If a block explorer does not say I have it, you did not send it, then I don't have the bitcoins. If my wallet software (that does not look too fancy as I just use either Bitcoin Core or Electrum) does not indicate the addresses contain bitcoin, then you didn't send me any bitcoins.

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

Interesting. So, you will not accept my statement that you have 10 eggs if I didn't actually give you 10 eggs. You will not accept my statement that you have 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in your garage and you have possession of the key that turns them on. Nor will you accept my statement that you have 10 BTC if the quantity is not in your wallet. Ok. Then I have only one question for you: why then are you accepting Satoshi's statements that you have xx BTC if Satoshi never actually gave you BTC, but only quantity statement - "xx", and name "BTC"? Because quantity statement and name is something that you recieved from me as well: "10", "eggs", "10", "Ferraris", "10", "BTC". And I have no problem arranging for you to have them verified on the blockchain and to get you private keys and address that you control. If I arrange all that will you give me xx USD for the quantity statement on nonexistent Ferraris? If not, why are you giving xx USD for Satoshi's quantity statements on nonexistent BTC?

If you can give me 10 BTC or provide the private keys to the address that have them, and allow me to transfer it to my own address, then I will accept that you have given me 10 BTC, provided at least 1 confirmation or block of the transaction.

If you have no problem arranging for all that, then I accept you have given me the BTC. But you have not made any arrangements at all. There is an address in my profile, you can try sending there if you want to prove something. So far, there is not.

I have no interest in your Ferraris and I'm certainly not paying for them. If you give them to me, that's different.

You have not given me 10 BTC yet, so ... this is all pointless.

If you are merely talking semantics, it makes no difference to me whether it's a quantity statement of a supposedly non-existent Bitcoins. We all know it's control or access to the same quantities but everyone accepts it as just "you sent me bitcoin, or I paid you bitcoin" which can be easily confirmed, if you actually sent it.

So send or do not send, I don't care if you think it exists or it doesn't, if it shows up in my wallet and I can confirm it independently from you, together with all the thousand of other full nodes out there, then I will accept you sent me BTC. If it's on the blockchain, it exists on the blockchain.

Satoshi has been out of the picture for several years, you can leave him out of it.

Also, you keep talking about Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn't exist. Only fake quantities on Bitcoin exist. If Bitcoin would exist you would be able to show either tangible or intangible good that provides direct benefit, or financial instrument that have subject with the liability to provide you something for the quantity in your wallet.

You said you believe in God but you also sound like an atheist. That seems contradictory.

Ive offered to buy the guy coffee with BTC but hes refused to put up an address.  So unserious in his arguments.

"Proof of gods existence" is another clue of what we are arguing with.   You cannot prove the existence of god. You also cannot disprove it.   Which is why most scientists ignore the question.  Its not a question which science is capable of answering.

So I've come to the conclusion what we are dealing with here is a philosopher.  Of which most are thinkers but never really get anywhere.  A few definitely do but most do not.  Our philosopher has already decided his answer and is attempting to apply science in the wrong direction.

[aysg76]

Although Bitcoin doesn't have a y physical existence like cards or fiat but it is some database in the system which add on the balance on your UTXO set and vice versa for blockchain to keep record of total Bitcoins and all the transactions.But if you say there is no existence then you are totally wrong and only person who will agree with you is Donald Trump or night be you have just turned his words to long article without any technical base presented here.So my some questions from you are regarding this:

1) If Bitcoin is made out from thin air or does not exist why are miners all around the world spending millions on building mining farms using ASIC machines and huge electricity consumption just to solve cryptographic puzzle in order to earn rewards or say 6.25 Bitcoins?

2) What exactly major companies like Tesla, MicroStrategy are holding in their reserve assest if they have made billion dollar worth investment?

3) Daily thousand of transaction are made and that not only trust because if you buy stuff from the market they will not give you free until they receive funds.So how do these transactions are settled without any funds or coins?

4) You just made investment in the Bitcoin from your wallets that automatically add intangible coins or say add the balance on your Bitcoin address in the form of database so all this is a false play According to you?

The Bitcoin network is running from the past 12 years successfully and many will come like you making false claim but it won't matter in the end.

[Carlton Banks]

***yaaaawn***

tokens are inherently abstractions of something real, that's what "token" means. welcome to monetary theory 101

[/thread]

[Antithesis]

I will not accept that you gave me 10 eggs if you didn't actually give me 10 eggs, nor will I accept that you gave me 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in my garage and I have possession of the key that turns them on.

If you say you give me 10 BTC or 10 bitcoins though, I will also not accept that you actually gave me 10 bitcoins until I see the quantity in my wallet, verified by miners. If it's nothing to you, I could care less, because to me, it is something.

But until I can verify in my address that I control, that I have the private keys to, that the transaction was confirmed in a block, then you did not send me any bitcoins.

At this point, it is irrelevant what the US dollar (or fiat) price is of those bitcoins. If a block explorer does not say I have it, you did not send it, then I don't have the bitcoins. If my wallet software (that does not look too fancy as I just use either Bitcoin Core or Electrum) does not indicate the addresses contain bitcoin, then you didn't send me any bitcoins.

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

Interesting. So, you will not accept my statement that you have 10 eggs if I didn't actually give you 10 eggs. You will not accept my statement that you have 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in your garage and you have possession of the key that turns them on. Nor will you accept my statement that you have 10 BTC if the quantity is not in your wallet. Ok. Then I have only one question for you: why then are you accepting Satoshi's statements that you have xx BTC if Satoshi never actually gave you BTC, but only quantity statement - "xx", and name "BTC"? Because quantity statement and name is something that you recieved from me as well: "10", "eggs", "10", "Ferraris", "10", "BTC". And I have no problem arranging for you to have them verified on the blockchain and to get you private keys and address that you control. If I arrange all that will you give me xx USD for the quantity statement on nonexistent Ferraris? If not, why are you giving xx USD for Satoshi's quantity statements on nonexistent BTC?

If you can give me 10 BTC or provide the private keys to the address that have them, and allow me to transfer it to my own address, then I will accept that you have given me 10 BTC, provided at least 1 confirmation or block of the transaction.

If you have no problem arranging for all that, then I accept you have given me the BTC. But you have not made any arrangements at all. There is an address in my profile, you can try sending there if you want to prove something. So far, there is not.

I have no interest in your Ferraris and I'm certainly not paying for them. If you give them to me, that's different.

You have not given me 10 BTC yet, so ... this is all pointless.

If you are merely talking semantics, it makes no difference to me whether it's a quantity statement of a supposedly non-existent Bitcoins. We all know it's control or access to the same quantities but everyone accepts it as just "you sent me bitcoin, or I paid you bitcoin" which can be easily confirmed, if you actually sent it.

So send or do not send, I don't care if you think it exists or it doesn't, if it shows up in my wallet and I can confirm it independently from you, together with all the thousand of other full nodes out there, then I will accept you sent me BTC. If it's on the blockchain, it exists on the blockchain.

Satoshi has been out of the picture for several years, you can leave him out of it.

Also, you keep talking about Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn't exist. Only fake quantities on Bitcoin exist. If Bitcoin would exist you would be able to show either tangible or intangible good that provides direct benefit, or financial instrument that have subject with the liability to provide you something for the quantity in your wallet.

You said you believe in God but you also sound like an atheist. That seems contradictory.

No, I can give you the same thing Satoshi's software does - statement on BTC existence. There you go: "Dabs -  10 BTC". So, this statement is informing you that you now own 10 bitcoins. There's no difference between this statement, and that of Satoshi's software, which you can read in your wallet. Both talk about quantity and name of a thing that doesn't exist in reality. The fact that Satoshi's statement is written after POW, shown via fancy application, and transfered between names ( blockchain addresses), doesn't change the fact that it's just a statement. Statements don't make things coming into existence. It is really mind blowing how you people cannot tell the difference between statements about things and things themselves.

[Antithesis]

I will not accept that you gave me 10 eggs if you didn't actually give me 10 eggs, nor will I accept that you gave me 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in my garage and I have possession of the key that turns them on.

If you say you give me 10 BTC or 10 bitcoins though, I will also not accept that you actually gave me 10 bitcoins until I see the quantity in my wallet, verified by miners. If it's nothing to you, I could care less, because to me, it is something.

But until I can verify in my address that I control, that I have the private keys to, that the transaction was confirmed in a block, then you did not send me any bitcoins.

At this point, it is irrelevant what the US dollar (or fiat) price is of those bitcoins. If a block explorer does not say I have it, you did not send it, then I don't have the bitcoins. If my wallet software (that does not look too fancy as I just use either Bitcoin Core or Electrum) does not indicate the addresses contain bitcoin, then you didn't send me any bitcoins.

Beyond all this discussion, it becomes either academic or moot or pointless as most of us don't have time to explain anything else to you. If it's being talked about, that's something, not nothing.

Interesting. So, you will not accept my statement that you have 10 eggs if I didn't actually give you 10 eggs. You will not accept my statement that you have 10 Ferrarris if those cars are not in your garage and you have possession of the key that turns them on. Nor will you accept my statement that you have 10 BTC if the quantity is not in your wallet. Ok. Then I have only one question for you: why then are you accepting Satoshi's statements that you have xx BTC if Satoshi never actually gave you BTC, but only quantity statement - "xx", and name "BTC"? Because quantity statement and name is something that you recieved from me as well: "10", "eggs", "10", "Ferraris", "10", "BTC". And I have no problem arranging for you to have them verified on the blockchain and to get you private keys and address that you control. If I arrange all that will you give me xx USD for the quantity statement on nonexistent Ferraris? If not, why are you giving xx USD for Satoshi's quantity statements on nonexistent BTC?

If you can give me 10 BTC or provide the private keys to the address that have them, and allow me to transfer it to my own address, then I will accept that you have given me 10 BTC, provided at least 1 confirmation or block of the transaction.

If you have no problem arranging for all that, then I accept you have given me the BTC. But you have not made any arrangements at all. There is an address in my profile, you can try sending there if you want to prove something. So far, there is not.

I have no interest in your Ferraris and I'm certainly not paying for them. If you give them to me, that's different.

You have not given me 10 BTC yet, so ... this is all pointless.

If you are merely talking semantics, it makes no difference to me whether it's a quantity statement of a supposedly non-existent Bitcoins. We all know it's control or access to the same quantities but everyone accepts it as just "you sent me bitcoin, or I paid you bitcoin" which can be easily confirmed, if you actually sent it.

So send or do not send, I don't care if you think it exists or it doesn't, if it shows up in my wallet and I can confirm it independently from you, together with all the thousand of other full nodes out there, then I will accept you sent me BTC. If it's on the blockchain, it exists on the blockchain.

Satoshi has been out of the picture for several years, you can leave him out of it.

Also, you keep talking about Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn't exist. Only fake quantities on Bitcoin exist. If Bitcoin would exist you would be able to show either tangible or intangible good that provides direct benefit, or financial instrument that have subject with the liability to provide you something for the quantity in your wallet.

You said you believe in God but you also sound like an atheist. That seems contradictory.

Ive offered to buy the guy coffee with BTC but hes refused to put up an address.  So unserious in his arguments.

"Proof of gods existence" is another clue of what we are arguing with.   You cannot prove the existence of god. You also cannot disprove it.   Which is why most scientists ignore the question.  Its not a question which science is capable of answering.

So I've come to the conclusion what we are dealing with here is a philosopher.  Of which most are thinkers but never really get anywhere.  A few definitely do but most do not.  Our philosopher has already decided his answer and is attempting to apply science in the wrong direction.

You have offered me to buy coffee with statement about BTC's existence. Not with a thing/asset/commodity which name is BTC. No such thing exists in the real world. That's why in the absence of people who would accept this statement you are left with nothing, no asset, no commodity.

[zanezane]

***yaaaawn***

tokens are inherently abstractions of something real, that's what "token" means. welcome to monetary theory 101

[/thread]

You're obviously wrong, OP thought that when he/she gets bitcoin, OP thinks that someone will send him physical coins like quarters and cents but I guess got disappointed and started to rant in this forum.

[Antithesis]

***yaaaawn***

tokens are inherently abstractions of something real, that's what "token" means. welcome to monetary theory 101

[/thread]

You're obviously wrong, OP thought that when he/she gets bitcoin, OP thinks that someone will send him physical coins like quarters and cents but I guess got disappointed and started to rant in this forum.

I came here to teach people the difference between statements about things and things themselves. Regarding tokens. Token is a physical or digital voucher redeemable by the issuer. When you say that bitcoin exists as a token you are actually saying that blockchain address holders can redeam quantity next to their addresses at the issuer of the quantity. And something like that is impossible. So no tokens exist in Bitcoin scheme. Only statements about them. False statements.

[Nhazwrath]

***yaaaawn***

tokens are inherently abstractions of something real, that's what "token" means. welcome to monetary theory 101

[/thread]

You're obviously wrong, OP thought that when he/she gets bitcoin, OP thinks that someone will send him physical coins like quarters and cents but I guess got disappointed and started to rant in this forum.

I came here to teach people the difference between statements about things and things themselves. Regarding tokens. Token is a physical or digital voucher redeemable by the issuer. When you say that bitcoin exists as a token you are actually saying that blockchain address holders can redeam quantity next to their addresses at the issuer of the quantity. And something like that is impossible. So no tokens exist in Bitcoin scheme. Only statements about them. False statements.

So  Can You Touch a Photon?  You cannot touch a photon 100% of what you know about photons is through secondary effects.  can you see photons? No you cannot, everything you think you see about photons is through secondary effects.   Any light entering your eye is only perceived through the electromagnetic force After it interacts with another electric field.

By itself its completely invisible/untouchable it doesn't even exist to you unless it interacts. 

Photons and electrons are the same family of particles called Bosons and Leptons since Bitcoin is stored as electrons in human defined patterns.  It totally exists.  As a Human defined pattern enforced by miners equipment.  You are literally attempting to deny the existence of the Universe and Humanity's effect of Divine ability to Change reality at this point. ( yes I threw in the divine   => )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon  I don't like to use wiki but as far as I can tell its correct in this case.

I can't drop down below quantum force.  Yet it still moves. 

[Dabs]

No, I can give you the same thing Satoshi's software does - statement on BTC existence. There you go: "Dabs -  10 BTC". So, this statement is informing you that you now own 10 bitcoins. There's no difference between this statement, and that of Satoshi's software, which you can read in your wallet. Both talk about quantity and name of a thing that doesn't exist in reality. The fact that Satoshi's statement is written after POW, shown via fancy application, and transfered between names ( blockchain addresses), doesn't change the fact that it's just a statement. Statements don't make things coming into existence. It is really mind blowing how you people cannot tell the difference between statements about things and things themselves.

The "statement" on my software does not indicate you have sent me 10 BTC. Please give me the transaction ID so I may verify it. Thank you.

[Antithesis]

No, I can give you the same thing Satoshi's software does - statement on BTC existence. There you go: "Dabs -  10 BTC". So, this statement is informing you that you now own 10 bitcoins. There's no difference between this statement, and that of Satoshi's software, which you can read in your wallet. Both talk about quantity and name of a thing that doesn't exist in reality. The fact that Satoshi's statement is written after POW, shown via fancy application, and transfered between names ( blockchain addresses), doesn't change the fact that it's just a statement. Statements don't make things coming into existence. It is really mind blowing how you people cannot tell the difference between statements about things and things themselves.

The "statement" on my software does not indicate you have sent me 10 BTC. Please give me the transaction ID so I may verify it. Thank you.

Of course it doesn't. Nor does the transaction ID. Both have nothing to do with BTC. They are just statements. BTC is nonexistent.

[Antithesis]

***yaaaawn***

tokens are inherently abstractions of something real, that's what "token" means. welcome to monetary theory 101

[/thread]

You're obviously wrong, OP thought that when he/she gets bitcoin, OP thinks that someone will send him physical coins like quarters and cents but I guess got disappointed and started to rant in this forum.

I came here to teach people the difference between statements about things and things themselves. Regarding tokens. Token is a physical or digital voucher redeemable by the issuer. When you say that bitcoin exists as a token you are actually saying that blockchain address holders can redeam quantity next to their addresses at the issuer of the quantity. And something like that is impossible. So no tokens exist in Bitcoin scheme. Only statements about them. False statements.

So  Can You Touch a Photon?  You cannot touch a photon 100% of what you know about photons is through secondary effects.  can you see photons? No you cannot, everything you think you see about photons is through secondary effects.   Any light entering your eye is only perceived through the electromagnetic force After it interacts with another electric field.

By itself its completely invisible/untouchable it doesn't even exist to you unless it interacts. 

Photons and electrons are the same family of particles called Bosons and Leptons since Bitcoin is stored as electrons in human defined patterns.  It totally exists.  As a Human defined pattern enforced by miners equipment.  You are literally attempting to deny the existence of the Universe and Humanity's effect of Divine ability to Change reality at this point. ( yes I threw in the divine   => )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon  I don't like to use wiki but as far as I can tell its correct in this case.

I can't drop down below quantum force.  Yet it still moves. 

So you are mentioning things detectible to our senses or artificial equipment. But why exactly? What is the point? I am not saying that Bitcoin is untouchable or undetectable. I am saying it is nonexistent. Only statements about it exist. Quantity statements in the blockchain written by the Satoshi's software. Why is it so hard for you to differentiate between statement about a thing and the thing itself?

[UKprod]

The illusory truth effect, refers to a phenomenon in which people, when hear the same false information repeated again and again, often come to believe it is true. Also, repetition of a such information increases its likelihood of being judged true. Even the most educated individuals are still prone to this effect. They may be skeptical of a false information the first time they hear it, but the more they are exposed to it, the more they start to feel like it’s true, and their previous knowledge is not able to prevent this.

As per your logic:
1. Gold bonds issued by Governments are fake - they are not backed by real gold.

2. Stocks that are sold on earlier in a day on intra-day trading are fake - because the seller never possessed the stock to begin with.

3. Fiat currencies are fake - "fiat" in itself stands for "trust" in the government for that currency, but it is known fact that government doesn't back the currency completely with other assets.

4. Entertainers, magicians, live singers, etc, all are fake - since once you see them perform and pay for it, you dont have anything tangible that you can carry.

5. A digital painting or a NFT is a fake - since i can never hang one on my wall at my home.

The list can go on. You're right, everything is illusory and nothing is the truth. Why are you so wise in your ways! 

[Dabs]

The "statement" on my software does not indicate you have sent me 10 BTC. Please give me the transaction ID so I may verify it. Thank you.

Of course it doesn't. Nor does the transaction ID. Both have nothing to do with BTC. They are just statements. BTC is nonexistent.

Well, I guess if BTC is nonexistent, then you can't send me any right? I think we're done talking to you. As Satoshi once said, if you don't get it, we don't really have time to explain it to you.

[Nhazwrath]

***yaaaawn***

tokens are inherently abstractions of something real, that's what "token" means. welcome to monetary theory 101

[/thread]

You're obviously wrong, OP thought that when he/she gets bitcoin, OP thinks that someone will send him physical coins like quarters and cents but I guess got disappointed and started to rant in this forum.

I came here to teach people the difference between statements about things and things themselves. Regarding tokens. Token is a physical or digital voucher redeemable by the issuer. When you say that bitcoin exists as a token you are actually saying that blockchain address holders can redeam quantity next to their addresses at the issuer of the quantity. And something like that is impossible. So no tokens exist in Bitcoin scheme. Only statements about them. False statements.

So  Can You Touch a Photon?  You cannot touch a photon 100% of what you know about photons is through secondary effects.  can you see photons? No you cannot, everything you think you see about photons is through secondary effects.   Any light entering your eye is only perceived through the electromagnetic force After it interacts with another electric field.

By itself its completely invisible/untouchable it doesn't even exist to you unless it interacts. 

Photons and electrons are the same family of particles called Bosons and Leptons since Bitcoin is stored as electrons in human defined patterns.  It totally exists.  As a Human defined pattern enforced by miners equipment.  You are literally attempting to deny the existence of the Universe and Humanity's effect of Divine ability to Change reality at this point. ( yes I threw in the divine   => )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon  I don't like to use wiki but as far as I can tell its correct in this case.

I can't drop down below quantum force.  Yet it still moves. 

So you are mentioning things detectible to our senses or artificial equipment. But why exactly? What is the point? I am not saying that Bitcoin is untouchable or undetectable. I am saying it is nonexistent. Only statements about it exist. Quantity statements in the blockchain written by the Satoshi's software. Why is it so hard for you to differentiate between statement about a thing and the thing itself?

So by your OWN logic.  why exactly?  Whats the point?  Why are you denying reality?  Because at this point you are.    Your clothes might as well not exist by your own non logic.   as I said previously  Philosopher with a bad idea trying to work backwards.   Never works.   Good for a useless document on the wall I am sure though.