Website with copy & paste rebuttals to common critiques regarding Bitcoin

[renek78]

Hi all,

I have created a website which helps to refute common critiques regarding Bitcoin. Answers can be copied for usage in social networks, forums, messenger, etc. No need to waste your time by manually addressing the same concerns over and over again. It is fully open-source and ad-free. German is properly translated. I used deepl.com for Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, French, Italian, Japanese and Russian. Anybody can help to improve the answers by editing the website.

Hope you guys find it useful!

https://bitcoinmythbusters.org/

Cheers
Rene

[1714918830]

1714918830

[1714918830]

1714918830

[1714918830]

1714918830

[1714918830]

1714918830

[1714918830]

1714918830

[NotATether]

Nice work.

You should probably also include "Cryptocurrency transaction processing speed is very slow". This is a common concern I hear from businesses asking other businesses about their crypto projects, particularly the ones related to Bitcoin, and while it's mostly true (it's not FUD), you might want to address what is currently being done to solve this problem in the long term, eg. layer-2 solutions like LN and some other shenanigans [a term which I use very loosely] being proposed for it like Eltoo.

[SFR10]

Answers can be copied

It'd be better if there was also a "copy to clipboard" button while hovering over the "detailed answer".
^{- The only problem with that is finding an easy way to auto-convert the included clickable links into a plain version [not sure if there's any since I'm not a coder].}

Anybody can help to improve the answers by editing the website.

I have very limited knowledge about how everything works on GitHub and if I understood everything correctly, anyone with an account could easily edit all of its parts; in other words, that might lead to a disaster.
Bookmarked

[Ucy]

Interesting.
Does the community have a way of ensuring that all answers are absolutely correct? Maybe by via evidence-based voting... meaning participants can approve or find faults in given answers by upvoting, downvoting or "neutral-voting" based on evidence collected for from Satoshi statements, from Bitcoin whitepaper, early Bitcoin software etc?
And I guess it would be better for a question to have multiple correct answers for people to choose from.

Hope it's really open source. Bookmarked

[renek78]

Thanks for all the positive feedback!
I guess a wiki style page might be even better than GitHub edits to onboard as many people as possible. But it is what it is now.

And I guess it would be better for a question to have multiple correct answers for people to choose from.

Sounds like a good idea. Easy to implement more than one answer.

[Lucius]

@renek78, I like the idea of gathering as much evidence as possible about all the myths that exist about Bitcoin, and I believe that there are a lot of quality posts on this forum that would be very good reading on your site.

One small observation regarding "Bitcoin is controlled by China", given that China has banned crypto mining and that any trading has been banned since 2019 - it would be good to mention these facts for all those who think that China still has some influence in Bitcoin control - except of course in the production of mining devices.

[renek78]

You can add or edit questions and answers by clicking the Edit on GitHub button on top of the page. If you add a new Critique & Answer make sure to copy a previous C&A in order to have consistent formatting. Auto-merge is enabled, so all your changes should be visible in the document right away, but I reserve the right to reverse changes that I find unhelpful.

IMO it's bad idea. One troll could destroy the repository instantly, IMO manual approve is better option as long as you frequently open GitHub.

I'll give it a try first. If what you describe really happens I'd change it back to manually merge pull requests.

[renek78]

@renek78, I like the idea of gathering as much evidence as possible about all the myths that exist about Bitcoin, and I believe that there are a lot of quality posts on this forum that would be very good reading on your site.

One small observation regarding "Bitcoin is controlled by China", given that China has banned crypto mining and that any trading has been banned since 2019 - it would be good to mention these facts for all those who think that China still has some influence in Bitcoin control - except of course in the production of mining devices.

Good point! Added it to my to-do list. Thanks very much!

[Lucius]

Good point! Added it to my to-do list. Thanks very much!

You're welcome

As for "Bitcoin Wastes Energy" I can suggest that you maybe add a link to an excellent post from our member @fillippone who gave a great insight into the problem and clarified some things in the thread Debunking the "Bitcoin is an environmental disaster" argument.

As for donations, I don't see any link as described in Donate, all that exists is the Disqus widget.

[renek78]

As for "Bitcoin Wastes Energy" I can suggest that you maybe add a link to an excellent post from our member @fillippone who gave a great insight into the problem and clarified some things in the thread Debunking the "Bitcoin is an environmental disaster" argument.

Thanks for the link. Have added it.

As for donations, I don't see any link as described in Donate, all that exists is the Disqus widget.

The donate button disappears once you change to a different language. Don't really know how to solve this problem.

[Ucy]

Thanks for all the positive feedback!
I guess a wiki style page might be even better than GitHub edits to onboard as many people as possible. But it is what it is now.

And I guess it would be better for a question to have multiple correct answers for people to choose from.

Sounds like a good idea. Easy to implement more than one answer.

I forgot to ask you about Grammer... How would you handle that? Do you ensure that all contributions are grammatically accurate before they can be copied by people and shared publicly? I assume that some will have good contributions but not accurate in Grammer. Guess you should try to make this as formal as possible

[Lucius]

The donate button disappears once you change to a different language. Don't really know how to solve this problem.

I don’t think it’s a problem because I haven’t changed the languages in the menu, and the donation link still doesn’t show. I'm not an expert to tell you how to fix it, but until you find out how - maybe you could add your BTC address as part of the Donate paragraph.

[Kakmakr]

Hey, great work.... why has nobody thought of this before?

I also get sick of people saying the same nonsense over and over again, so it is nice to have a one stop website where all the prepared answers are posted... I will surely add this to my favorite websites and just use it when it is needed.  

I will add an additional myth.... "Bitcoin is Slow" .... then add to the answer that people should be using the Lightning Network.. if they want "fast" transactions. (I see you added the Lightning Network as payment option for donations)  

Once again... job well done.  

[BlackHatCoiner]

I love it. 


But, as for this:

If Bitcoin ever reaches the status of a world reserve currency it can be assumed that the price will develop in tandem with the world economy.

But even nowadays, when push comes to shove, Bitcoin's "volatility" is barely noticeable when compared to a hyperinflationary currency.

I was having the same discussion today and I slightly disagree. Not for the Bitcoin's volatility compared to a hyperinflationary currency, but for its price to be in tandem with the world's economy. I personally see it more as a store of value asset, rather than that.

The difference with gold is that it doesn't have the same manipulators. It's owned by the government; not by individuals. Personal opinion, but those who have lots of Bitcoins can manipulate the price whether it's a global adopted commodity or not.

[Welsh]

IMO it's bad idea. One troll could destroy the repository instantly, IMO manual approve is better option as long as you frequently open GitHub.

You're correct, though the ideal scenario would be that it would be transparently reviewed by multiple different people to try, and avoid bias. Any rejected entries could potentially be displayed to the public in a non intrusive way.

The donate button disappears once you change to a different language. Don't really know how to solve this problem.

It's better to have something functional, than it is to have something look fancy. It would be better to just include a Bitcoin address you wish to receive the donations, instead of making a button which isn't visible to all users.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I don't bother to create a new thread, I'll just write it in here, since I'll quote part of that website. While I find every answer proper, except the volatility that I quoted above, I've taken a better look on the first answer and it is, no offense, ridiculous.

For proponents, Bitcoin's intrinsic value lies in the fact that it is a scarce, uncorrelated asset with unique intangible properties (immutable, open, borderless, decentralized, censorship resistant, etc.).

For the first time in history, anyone in the world with an internet connection can function as their very own bank while participating in the economy with full control of their wealth.

The seven characteristics of money are durability, portability, divisibility, uniformity, limited supply, and acceptability. Many bitcoin proponents adamantly believe that bitcoin checks all of these boxes and is therefore hard money with real intrinsic value.

Oftentimes, those who ascribe zero intrinsic value to bitcoin have done so by way of imperfect knowledge, a narrow perspective, and/or old-aged frameworks that under-represent, if not misrepresent, the capabilities of bitcoin and the very idea of "value".

People tend to confuse that every kind of money has intrinsic value. Well, that is very wrong assumption supposing you meant the term in numismatics and not in ethics nor in finance. Intrinsic value of a currency is the market value of the constituent metal within the coin. In other words, it's the essence that can be used in some other activity, not just for exchanging goods with it. It is the essence that makes it a good too.

Bitcoin, just like fiat currencies, doesn't have intrinsic value, because it can't be used beyond its exchanging purpose. It does have value, though. I don't get why that mania to make it intrinsically valuated.

[icopress]

One small observation regarding "Bitcoin is controlled by China", given that China has banned crypto mining and that any trading has been banned since 2019 - it would be good to mention these facts for all those who think that China still has some influence in Bitcoin control - except of course in the production of mining devices.

This is all true, of course, but do not forget that no matter what policy the Chinese government pursues, Chinese miners and their power will still remain Chinese, (even after relocation to the near abroad). In addition, I believe that we and the entire Bitcoin ecosystem have been damn lucky in recent years, including the events of recent months ... since, with a strong desire, China has enough strength and resources to partly make the Bitcoin machine a mouthpiece of communist propaganda. Correct me if I am wrong.

[Lucius]

This is all true, of course, but do not forget that no matter what policy the Chinese government pursues, Chinese miners and their power will still remain Chinese, (even after relocation to the near abroad).

If a Chinese person owns something in another country in the world, then he operates according to the laws of that country - I think it is crucial that China no longer has (or at least should not have) influence over Bitcoin whether it is trading or mining. In general, this should be a good thing, as many investors (especially the US) have always been quite skeptical that the Chinese allegedly control too much when it comes to Bitcoin - and to some extent they have had the right to think so.

In addition, I believe that we and the entire Bitcoin ecosystem have been damn lucky in recent years, including the events of recent months ... since, with a strong desire, China has enough strength and resources to partly make the Bitcoin machine a mouthpiece of communist propaganda. Correct me if I am wrong.

You can look at it from that perspective, but it's not just about being lucky in something, it's much more important that Bitcoin is not something you can just turn off when you want to, even if you're as powerful as China. It may not seem like it, but Bitcoin has always been a pretty trivial thing for China, just one of the things they put on the list for complete elimination in 2019 (I mean mining) - because in terms of the profit it brings them in terms of total GDP, it is an amount that is almost insignificant for such big country.

[icopress]

Apparently you have never encountered the Chinese and their mentality, just to be clear ... there are Chinese and there is the rest of the world, (at least this is the key thought of their nationality). Here's an example ... can you tell for sure if Bitmain uses new ASICs before sending them to customers? And what you call "insignificant influence" is not so insignificant, since the entire Chinese economy and spheres of influence are in fact built on such small grains.

In addition, if China is determined to remain the world's leading economy, it needs to either adapt to digital transformation or create its own parallel niche. Well, you can talk for a long time ... but since we are moving away from the topic of conversation, I propose to put an end to it.

[LoyceV]

Bitcoin shows no signs of a Ponzi scheme: New investors are not paid with money from old ones, there was no premining of coins and it does not have a leadership team. Bitcoin grew very organically since its creation and the market is pricing the asset, as it sees fit.

Isn't this the other way around in any investment? So: "old investors are paid with money from new ones"? Okay, technically it could also be existing investors, but if I sell a stock or Bitcoin, I get money from whoever buys it. There's nothing wrong with that, but I don't see how this can be used as an argument that something isn't a ponzi.