To the people who only see the downsides of HODLing Bitcoin

[Yukyzu]

Humans can be very controversial, such that everybody can never have the same view and opinion at every point in time, at the invention of Bitcoin majority thought it was a scam and today they must have been filled with so much regrets for not utilizing such opportunity of owning a Bitcoin asset at it's earliest days simply because of how much increments in value and the wider spread adoption Bitcoin has become off, Bitcoin is still a growing asset class hence am not surprised seeing that there are still those who only sees the downside of holding Bitcoin. Generally, I would say that everybody can never have the same mentality as regards to utilizing and maximizing the potential that Bitcoin holds as best performed when hold for a long term investment for at least 4 to 10 years or more.

Everyone will certainly have an opinion according to the knowledge they have and for those who want to learn new things first, of course this is better because not all new things can be easily accepted by many people and they must first learn in order to accept it like Bitcoin which many consider something that cannot produce anything from holding the asset but for those who learn first will certainly try to accept and hold the asset so that they have been able to make a profit but for those who ignore the potential of Bitcoin will certainly regret it when others can make a profit from it. Yes, indeed not everyone has the same mentality in utilizing the potential of Bitcoin which has high volatility and for those who want to learn well then they will be able to hold the asset and also be able to make a profit from Bitcoin.

[Darker45]

Utility, use cases are mutually support each other. You have nearly no reasons to HODL bitcoin if it does not have good utility and not many use cases.

Because basically we see that value creates from utility and use cases which not only Bitcoin but also many projects in blockchain and cryptocurrency aim at. They can succeed or fail with this mission to build up utility and use cases for their blockchain and coin or token but without value (lack of utility and use cases), price on market will be reflected properly to match with intrinsic value.

I'm sure a great many Bitcoin hodlers don't care about utility and use cases. Many don't even understand or even care about the features of Bitcoin. They're simply joining the Bitcoin investment bandwagon. That's enough for them.

I don't think Satoshi aimed at a number of use cases for Bitcoin. I believe the goal was to make an electronic cash system, an internet money. I don't think the intention was to create a new asset class or a financial instrument that people could speculate on or whatever. Bitcoin's features aren't use cases.

[SamReomo]

I'm sure a great many Bitcoin hodlers don't care about utility and use cases. Many don't even understand or even care about the features of Bitcoin.

Well, the serious investors do care about the utility and use cases and that's why they're holding Bitcoin for so long so they can earn enough profits from it. You're right that there are so many investors who don't really care about those details but are hodling Bitcoin in hope to get rich because everyone talks about it but those are not the good investors but rather the greedy fellows who just want to invest blindly in assets that they don't understand themselves.

[Samlucky O]

We only need ordinary people like you and me to start using Bitcoin in any way each person would like.

Definitely, that's why they said bitcoin is for the Common man. It shouldn't be something that is too hard to use or Invest in, but some people are still hard heartened and doubtful to invest. even as it has proven to be the best digital asset so far.

Bitcoin is a movement that attracts "The Cabal" to where the people are. Currently, we now have Black Rock and the largest asset managers having investments in Bitcoin, and Trump and other politicians talking seriously about Bitcoin. Ten years ago suggesting that that would happen would be laughable.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Why won't they talk seriously about bitcoin or invest on it why they have seen the importance of it. Of course they have now seen the possible outcome after so many years of doubt and yet Bitcoin proved itself beyond reasonable doubt by growing faster than they least expect. Obviously bitcoin is the best digital asset anyone can think of right now, and I guess this rich folks has massively regretted why they didn't invest when it was less than a Dolla.

[legendbtc]

I'm sure a great many Bitcoin hodlers don't care about utility and use cases. Many don't even understand or even care about the features of Bitcoin.

Well, the serious investors do care about the utility and use cases and that's why they're holding Bitcoin for so long so they can earn enough profits from it. You're right that there are so many investors who don't really care about those details but are hodling Bitcoin in hope to get rich because everyone talks about it but those are not the good investors but rather the greedy fellows who just want to invest blindly in assets that they don't understand themselves.

But the ultimate goal is also profit, if bitcoin is stable and has no price fluctuations and it is only used as a peer-to-peer currency. I bet you that not too many people will be interested in bitcoin and hold on to it for long, and it will not be able to achieve the achievements it has today.
Many people say they are interested in bitcoin because it is decentralized, giving them increased privacy...but if you notice they like to discuss its price volatility, rarely discussing its utility or the use case of bitcoin. That shows that price and profit are still their top concerns. Therefore, we do not need to criticize others for being greedy when they only care about profits and do not care about the utility of bitcoin. Everyone has different needs and preferences, we should respect each other's decisions.

[Wind_FURY]

Are you suggesting that we actually should deny Bitcoin's technical design, what it's capable of achieving, and its power made possible from that technical design because you argue "white paper"?

Pardon me ser, but respectfully, it's a laughable suggestion.

Well, not at all. Notice how I have never denied any of Bitcoin’s utility but rather used what has been stated in this thread as an opposition to some of the pointers brought up. The impression that I’ve been getting from your posts is that you’re focusing on what ‘Bitcoin’s main value proposition’ is and my response was meant to target exactly that. Contrary to popular belief, Bitcoin’s original intentions and current intentions is to create a currency which can facilitate micro transactions on a peer to peer level.

But on a technical level, to make it actually scale - meaning increasing throughput without sacrificing decentralization, it's not that simple. Do you actually believe Bitcoin can compete against the U.S. Dollar in facilitating coffee-transactions? Let's be practical and accept what Bitcoin currently is today.

Sure, you can argue that censorship is in the books, but that isn't the design focus.

Are you sure? Because what is Bitcoin using POW for? Why waste all that energy? Why the incentive structure?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This is no mere consumer product for payment processing.

If you’re looking for something that ensures your anonymity and by extension censorship resistant, then the key value proposition of Monero fits better.

Perhaps you're right, but Bitcoin is OK too, and it has more adoption/network effects that Monero will NEVER EVER reach.

Not acknowledging the actual utility of Bitcoin and what us as developers has worked towards seems to focus and distort the perspective of everyone having the HODLING = Good. Expecting a currency to function like a currency for the masses without actively doing so seems to be a direct contradiction the main value proposition of Bitcoin, which is that's right: Facilitating peer to peer transactions. That is laughable.

Who is not acknowledging the actual utility of Bitcoin, not me. I'm merely saying not to waste your precious coins and that it's probably better to wait to use it until completely necessary. Although it depends from situation to situation. If you earn your Bitcoin in Bitcoin as a salary, then if you need to spend/sell it to buy what you need, then OK.

In fact, HODLING is not intended to encourage people to hold Bitcoins and not actively use it. It was actually to dissuade people from panic selling in the volatile market conditions. That is fairly reasonable and I don’t dispute it. However, the perspective presented in this thread appears to be vastly different. Instead of HODLING, I suggest a better term to be hoarding.

No, I don't agree. In 10 years many people who spent their precious Bitcoins today, will be regretting the mistake of wasting a very valuable resource. I will wait until the price is on a seven digit valuation, and when the Lightning Network has enough liquidity and reliability to be used for "coffee-transactions".

[ranochigo]

But on a technical level, to make it actually scale - meaning increasing throughput without sacrificing decentralization, it's not that simple. Do you actually believe Bitcoin can compete against the U.S. Dollar in facilitating coffee-transactions? Let's be practical and accept what Bitcoin currently is today.

I think of it as a compromise. Bitcoin as it is today, has the same degree of (de)centralization if you're considering LN or not. Practicality-wise, I think LN is the step in the right direction and as far as the moving goalpost goes, we're making steps with Taproot, Schnorr, etc. Accepting the status quo seems to be the loser mentality.

Are you sure? Because what is Bitcoin using POW for? Why waste all that energy? Why the incentive structure?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This is no mere consumer product for payment processing.

Well, to solve the Byzantines General problem for a P2P system without a trusted intermediary. That is the primary goal, and you can derive decentralization and/or censorship-resistant (arguably depending on how people perceive fungibility), etc. Censorship-resistance is indeed not the primary focus. However, that is not why you're spending your Bitcoins, that defeats the most basic and fundamental purpose of it. Using it to pay for a cup of coffee is already leveraging on its biggest utility; peer to peer payment. I'd be more worried if people think they shouldn't use Bitcoin as a currency for their daily spendings.

Who is not acknowledging the actual utility of Bitcoin, not me. I'm merely saying not to waste your precious coins and that it's probably better to wait to use it until completely necessary. Although it depends from situation to situation. If you earn your Bitcoin in Bitcoin as a salary, then if you need to spend/sell it to buy what you need, then OK.

Sure, I guess neither of us are not acknowledging the actual utility of Bitcoin. I guess the utility of Bitcoin really isn't to be able to pay for my cup of coffee  . Nitpicking to only use Bitcoin in specific scenarios is quite strange, but that is also up to you. I'm not going to argue with you on that  . I'll continue on my way of DCAing and spending Bitcoins as and when possible.

I see Bitcoin as a currency, not as a precious asset. If you think of Bitcoin as something that everyone should just hold, then that's up to you. Common consensus is that Bitcoin is often termed as a "currency", "money", etc.

No, I don't agree. In 10 years many people who spent their precious Bitcoins today, will be regretting the mistake of wasting a very valuable resource. I will wait until the price is on a seven digit valuation, and when the Lightning Network has enough liquidity and reliability to be used for "coffee-transactions".

I guess that's up to you. HODLing has infact been established as such and I'm not going to dispute that definition. Bitcoin would never be this valuable if companies or the population never saw it as a currency that they can spend in the future. I'm not going to lose out to be a billionaire if I'm spending my $5 bucks in BTC on lunch, opportunity cost is quite low actually.

I rest my case. Doesn't seem like this topic is going anywhere if you're so insistent on not spending your BTC 

[Darker45]

I'm sure a great many Bitcoin hodlers don't care about utility and use cases. Many don't even understand or even care about the features of Bitcoin.

Well, the serious investors do care about the utility and use cases and that's why they're holding Bitcoin for so long so they can earn enough profits from it. You're right that there are so many investors who don't really care about those details but are hodling Bitcoin in hope to get rich because everyone talks about it but those are not the good investors but rather the greedy fellows who just want to invest blindly in assets that they don't understand themselves.

I'm not sure. As a matter of fact, "investors" and "utility" or "use cases" might not go well together in a single sentence. If you invest in Bitcoin, that means you are mainly after ROI or profit. I've personally known individuals who have invested in Bitcoin but don't have an inkling as to what makes it a revolutionary currency.

Many investors don't even agree that Bitcoin is money. They invested in a Bitcoin ETF and yet they don't agree that it is a currency. How can we, then, say that these people care about utility and use cases? They don't agree with Satoshi, they don't share the fundamental philosophy of Bitcoin, they aren't even in favor of decentralization, and so on and yet they invested in Bitcoin. They only care about making money. 

[Wind_FURY]

But on a technical level, to make it actually scale - meaning increasing throughput without sacrificing decentralization, it's not that simple. Do you actually believe Bitcoin can compete against the U.S. Dollar in facilitating coffee-transactions? Let's be practical and accept what Bitcoin currently is today.

I think of it as a compromise. Bitcoin as it is today, has the same degree of (de)centralization if you're considering LN or not. Practicality-wise, I think LN is the step in the right direction and as far as the moving goalpost goes, we're making steps with Taproot, Schnorr, etc. Accepting the status quo seems to be the loser mentality.

I'm sorry, but I can't agree. Centralizing a decentralized network to increase throughput is NOT real scaling. The BCash people absolutely got it wrong.

Are you sure? Because what is Bitcoin using POW for? Why waste all that energy? Why the incentive structure?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This is no mere consumer product for payment processing.

Well, to solve the Byzantines General problem for a P2P system without a trusted intermediary. That is the primary goal, and you can derive decentralization and/or censorship-resistant (arguably depending on how people perceive fungibility), etc. Censorship-resistance is indeed not the primary focus. However, that is not why you're spending your Bitcoins, that defeats the most basic and fundamental purpose of it. Using it to pay for a cup of coffee is already leveraging on its biggest utility; peer to peer payment. I'd be more worried if people think they shouldn't use Bitcoin as a currency for their daily spendings.

?

Either I'm confused, or you're not making sense.

Who is not acknowledging the actual utility of Bitcoin, not me. I'm merely saying not to waste your precious coins and that it's probably better to wait to use it until completely necessary. Although it depends from situation to situation. If you earn your Bitcoin in Bitcoin as a salary, then if you need to spend/sell it to buy what you need, then OK.

Sure, I guess neither of us are not acknowledging the actual utility of Bitcoin. I guess the utility of Bitcoin really isn't to be able to pay for my cup of coffee  . Nitpicking to only use Bitcoin in specific scenarios is quite strange, but that is also up to you. I'm not going to argue with you on that  . I'll continue on my way of DCAing and spending Bitcoins as and when possible.

I see Bitcoin as a currency, not as a precious asset. If you think of Bitcoin as something that everyone should just hold, then that's up to you. Common consensus is that Bitcoin is often termed as a "currency", "money", etc.

My argument is, knowing and understanding how Bitcoin actually works, why waste this valuable resource for coffee-transactions?

But who am I to dictate what to do, there are "art collectors" willing to use their Bitcoins to pay high fees for their dick pics and fart sounds.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

No, I don't agree. In 10 years many people who spent their precious Bitcoins today, will be regretting the mistake of wasting a very valuable resource. I will wait until the price is on a seven digit valuation, and when the Lightning Network has enough liquidity and reliability to be used for "coffee-transactions".

I guess that's up to you. HODLing has infact been established as such and I'm not going to dispute that definition. Bitcoin would never be this valuable if companies or the population never saw it as a currency that they can spend in the future. I'm not going to lose out to be a billionaire if I'm spending my $5 bucks in BTC on lunch, opportunity cost is quite low actually.

I rest my case. Doesn't seem like this topic is going anywhere if you're so insistent on not spending your BTC 

👍

[Wind_FURY]

Bitcoin users shouldn't forget the main value-propostion of Bitcoin because of all the efforts in maintaining its its design, and maintaining decentralization = Censorship-Resistance.

Plus if there are no willing HODLers/savers in a financial system that actually values the currency, then how can it have actual value for other people?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[P3Key]

Looking at the growing trend of Bitcoin over the years and various countries starting to accept and adopt it, it is all about time and a waiting game until all countries will fully adopt Bitcoin globally. I believe, if the hype is keep growing bigger, the demand  from people of each country will keep growing also a, eventually the government and politicians will listen to us.

[Z-tight]

Looking at the growing trend of Bitcoin over the years and various countries starting to accept and adopt it, it is all about time and a waiting game until all countries will fully adopt Bitcoin globally. I believe, if the hype is keep growing bigger, the demand  from people of each country will keep growing also a, eventually the government and politicians will listen to us.

When you say adopt BTC globally, what do you mean? BTC is legal in so many countries, and what most of them want to do now is find a way to regulate it, attack people's privacy when using BTC and attack no-kyc services. If you ask me, that isn't something to celebrate, BTC is a decentralized network and bitcoiners should stop seeking validation from politicians, because they are always after their own interest only.

[P3Key]

Looking at the growing trend of Bitcoin over the years and various countries starting to accept and adopt it, it is all about time and a waiting game until all countries will fully adopt Bitcoin globally. I believe, if the hype is keep growing bigger, the demand  from people of each country will keep growing also a, eventually the government and politicians will listen to us.

When you say adopt BTC globally, what do you mean? BTC is legal in so many countries, and what most of them want to do now is find a way to regulate it, attack people's privacy when using BTC and attack no-kyc services. If you ask me, that isn't something to celebrate, BTC is a decentralized network and bitcoiners should stop seeking validation from politicians, because they are always after their own interest only.

I understand your point, what I meant with "full adoption' of Bitcoin is to accept it as legal payment like FIAT within a country, when you can buy things in real life by using it, like property and vehicles under the protection of law. Not all country accept BTC as one of their legal payments.

But, on second thought. I realized what you said is correct, that when a country already accept BTC as a legal payment, which means the regulation already there, government could also legally peek into our data and that will erase the concept of privacy in cryptocurrency.

[EarnOnVictor]

People who only see downsides of HODling bitcoin don't only exist now. They already existed fifteen years ago and have existed all the way through.

I suppose you are one of those you referred to 15 years ago just like me because if you are being sincere, you can't oblige anyone if Bitcoin was preached to you 15 years ago. I assume you are a true Bitcoin adopter now (just like). This can only mean that those who did not believe in Bitcoin are now lower in percentage than then.

You should also know that adopting Bitcoin is not all about HODLing, many are still not HODLing but may earn more than the HODLer with this current market reality if are good with its speculation and do the arithmetic based on its history.

You only have to compare between those who had that vision and those who had the opposite vision to see which is the better way.

This is not about any vision but how much you can make from Bitcoin, bro. Any which way, just keep earning with the coin, HODLing is not the only approach to achieve this.

[Yucky]

Looking at the growing trend of Bitcoin over the years and various countries starting to accept and adopt it, it is all about time and a waiting game until all countries will fully adopt Bitcoin globally. I believe, if the hype is keep growing bigger, the demand  from people of each country will keep growing also a, eventually the government and politicians will listen to us.

When you say adopt BTC globally, what do you mean? BTC is legal in so many countries, and what most of them want to do now is find a way to regulate it, attack people's privacy when using BTC and attack no-kyc services. If you ask me, that isn't something to celebrate, BTC is a decentralized network and bitcoiners should stop seeking validation from politicians, because they are always after their own interest only.

I understand your point, what I meant with "full adoption' of Bitcoin is to accept it as legal payment like FIAT within a country, when you can buy things in real life by using it, like property and vehicles under the protection of law. Not all country accept BTC as one of their legal payments.

all countries will definitely not accept Bitcoin as a legal tender because it's not all of them that will eventually see the good side of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is on the opposite side of what the government likes. Bitcoin preaches freedom and total control of ones wealth while the government wants to have control over people's wealth. As long as they see Bitcoin from that angle, they will continue to look at it as a major threat that should be wiped out or at the least regulated.

But, on second thought. I realized what you said is correct, that when a country already accept BTC as a legal payment, which means the regulation already there, government could also legally peek into our data and that will erase the concept of privacy in cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin is decentralized and even if the government manage to regulate some exchange and crub thier activities, they can't regulate Bitcoin because of its decentralized nature.

[Mpamaegbu]

Bitcoin is a movement that attracts "The Cabal" to where the people are.

Just like ants get to sugar, capitalists also get attracted to whatever that makes them money. Don't begrudge the rich/cabal when you see them behave likewise. It's business sense. No one likes to lose money or invest in something unprofitable.

Currently, we now have Black Rock and the largest asset managers having investments in Bitcoin, and Trump and other politicians talking seriously about Bitcoin. Ten years ago suggesting that that would happen would be laughable.

Well, what makes your submission unbalanced is the fact that it's suggestive that those who hedl made Bitcoin what it's today. Nah, that's not true. In actual fact, the activities of those who bought and sold (sellers) are what gave (and is giving) Bitcoin its value. The true value of any goods isn't known until it's exposed to the activities of sellers and buyers.

[The Cryptovator]

Don't take them seriously, those are negatives about Bitcoin and downsides to holding Bitcoin. Because everything is happening in practical, we don't need to imagine it. We just need to look back and read Bitcoin history. So that we can realise what Bitcoin is and  ignore such downsides people. But for sure, there should be some stage of holding. We just can't hold it for a lifetime; otherwise, we can't use Bitcoin in real life. Each of us should have a real target, so until we reach that point, we will hold. And if it goes down again, we can buy it back for sure. It's not trade, actually, because holding long and taking advantage of the volatile.

However, we have to use our brains regarding holding, we shouldn't follow negative people. Shame for them still who thinks downsides for Bitcoin holding. They are just afraid; they didn't study Bitcoin deeply. 

[passwordnow]

Looking at the growing trend of Bitcoin over the years and various countries starting to accept and adopt it, it is all about time and a waiting game until all countries will fully adopt Bitcoin globally.

While I am optimistic about Bitcoin's adoption, being accepted for "all" countries won't probably happen. We know how some of the countries don't like Bitcoin into their country and jurisdictions. But even if they say that they don't like Bitcoin, it is for sure that many of their people are into Bitcoin and are holding secretly.

I believe, if the hype is keep growing bigger, the demand  from people of each country will keep growing also a, eventually the government and politicians will listen to us.

Bitcoin doesn't need any hype just as what we see with the altcoins and the meme coins. Its hype is going to last long and it will remain to be the top crypto in the market and that's why we only have to hold, buy, sell and send as much as we can and we're already contributing to its ecosystem. Bitcoin is unstoppable and no matter what FUD we see in the community done by known financial institutions and politicians, it will continue to rise.

[hd49728]

Don't take them seriously, those are negatives about Bitcoin and downsides to holding Bitcoin. Because everything is happening in practical, we don't need to imagine it. We just need to look back and read Bitcoin history. So that we can realise what Bitcoin is and  ignore such downsides people.

Before doing our investment, we must do a prerequisite, do our due diligent research first. With such research, we can easily ignore negative talks about Bitcoin because we're knowledgeable enough to know it's untrue.

By looking at Bitcoin history and its price, we can increase our confidence.

Bitcoin history book
Yearly candles show that hodlers have kind of simple jobs.
Hodl Camp shows if you can hold your bitcoin more than 5 years, you get profit.

But for sure, there should be some stage of holding.

Beginners start with holding in fear, uncertain and with time, after one or two market cycles, they will hold with confidence.

Reading about the bullish case for Bitcoin can help increasing their confidence too.

[Cryptohygenic]

Ten years ago suggesting that that would happen would be laughable.

That was just how doubting it was to most of us when bitcoin was newly introduced which caused us to miss out in adopting it earlier.
99% of adoptors today never believed bitcoin would be so valuable with such amount of its dominance today simply because we believed it was a scam.
That was really inevitable. However, the reliability to believe in digital finances has not been this convinceable then due to conciousness of being fraudulent victims but perhaps, bitcoin has become an open door for more digital financial inventories to be attracted by the public due to its legitimacy.