Insofar as external issues (political, social and infrastructure issues) shouldn't be ignored, I agree completely. I'm just making the distinction between those externalities and the question of systemic trust.The issues may be external to the codebase of BTC, but they make up an important part of the overall system. So, they should not be ignored, the political, social and infrastructure issues are as important as the codebase of BTC.
Distribution is an issue but I don't think there was any way of avoiding it in designing and setting out bitcoin. With regard to manipulation, you're right to say that market cap expansion in and of itself won't be sufficient to counter market manipulation. However, market cap expansion as a symptom of much greater active adoption will.With every system, there are positives and negatives. In the current Fiat world, the average Joe can earn fiat through work and the average Joe trusts the system. In BTC, there are only a small percentage that can earn BTC, there are the issues also related with the distribution of BTC. I am not sure if this still holds true but 99% of BTC holders hold less than 1 BTC.
So manipulation will not dissipate as market capitalisation expands, as an increase in market capitalisation does not change the ownership breakdown.
Technology is a tool - nothing more. Mileage will vary based upon specifically how its deployed. There's no question but that Satoshi attempted to harness technology to solve existing issues with regard for the political/social/infrastructural. That's a fine art though. To your point, every system does have positives and negatives - and it's for that reason that a range of crypto's / digital assets will serve a range of needs as we move forward.I have said this on the other thread, the technology is a nice novel concept, but technology is not the only factor on whether something should be adopted.
With ownership comes responsibility. Bitcoin has to be stored securely.I note from yesterday's court case that the judge was particularly moved by the couple who lost their life savings in bitcoin. The mind boggles.
What was boggling my mind was that a couple would have their life savings in bitcoin. Even the most enthusiastic hedge fund goes no further than 1%.With ownership comes responsibility. Bitcoin has to be stored securely.
I'm a simple soul.
I have a fair bit of trust that my €X in my bank account won't lose too much of its purchasing power or at least that if I see hyper-inflation looming I can take corrective action.
How anybody can have any trust on bitcoin's purchasing power a month ahead never mind a few years absolutely escapes me.
What was boggling my mind was that a couple would have their life savings in bitcoin.
Just once? Leo, how many of my questions do you think you've ignored or left unanswered?....because I can tell you, there's plenty of them. I just haven't been mr. pedantic about trying to nail you to the cross in that regard.
Also, I think Bitcoin's price fluctuates too much to be used by the general public. Sure it may claim to protect against inflation, but only in extreme cases does inflation cause too much bother for people.
AAAhhh....so YOU ask the questions around here Leo. The audacity on my part to dare to ask a few questions to advance the conversation. As regards this 'distracting' charge - it's a complete contrivance but continue on with it if it makes you feel better.that appears to be your approach to distract from having to answer a key question.ht of course, there are way too many to count, but as I've said,
Go back and re-read. I addressed the topic. Again, maybe you'd prefer to write my posts for me so that they're to your liking.If you'll just tell me how I might send bitcoin via an existing satellite service without the need for an internet connection, I'll answer any question of your choosing.
AAAhhh....so YOU ask the questions around here Leo. The audacity on my part to dare to ask a few questions to advance the conversation. As regards this 'distracting' charge - it's a complete contrivance but continue on with it if it makes you feel better.
Go back and re-read. I addressed the topic. Again, maybe you'd prefer to write my posts for me so that they're to your liking.
The point put to you is that it seems your questions are more important than mine. Secondly, you were (and are) the one whinging about answers to questions - when in reality it's that you don't like the answers. I didn't whinge about any such thing - but we're on the subject now - perhaps you can clarify why there's a whole host of questions you've left unanswered. Carry on with this nonsense Leo and you'll be held to the very same standard. It's just a shame people have to read through your nonsense.There is plenty of evidence here that anyone can ask questions, it just appears you have a difficult time answering some of those directed at you.
Just like you were looking hard for that report I linked to last week? I answered it - you can't find it - that becomes your problem Leo. And you can scream bloody blue murder - I don't give a fiddlers. You can claim that I haven't answered the question - and I'll come back and correct you on it. How long have you got? Because you won't be drowning me out.In which post did you clarify how I might go about sending bitcoin over a satellite service without need for an internet connection? I've been looking hard, but I don't see it.
The point put to you is that it seems your questions are more important than mine. Secondly, you were (and are) the one whinging about answers to questions - when in reality it's that you don't like the answers.
Source pleaseI agree that its too cumbersome for regular joe's to use. The difference is that you don't seem to think that this can evolve.
Source pleaseAgain, like Firefly you're not open to the consideration that usability can be improved upon
Source pleaseAs Wolfie pointed out to you, they've been proven to be corruptible. So - others have gone with digital currencies as @Firefly proposes.
Source please
Source please
Source please
On the back of that, here comes my next question. Ready?No, not at all. It's clear I have already answered a number of other questions you have posed in this thread since you accused me of of being wrong there.
Because I did answer your question - and beyond that, your social capital with me is sub-zero. This was never supposed to be about wrong/right - but you and a couple of others here moulded it that from the outset. So seeing as that's what we're left with - I'll point out what I pointed out to you a couple of days ago. You were wrong about the proposition that is bitcoin a few years ago - and you continue to be proven wrong.Why can't you just answer that question and prove me wrong?
As per previous discussions (and as I know you're being disingenuous here and trying to add fuel to the fire, I'm not going trawling through previous posts to find them). If you'd like to correct me on it, go on ahead - perhaps you've had a change of heart.Fruitfly said:Source please
This is all that's left for the embittered to go on with - pathetic.Ha! Good luck with that
I can't see how anybody can have any great trust in bitcoin maintaining its purchasing power. It may be a great speculation and I suspect that is its main attraction but we've covered that ground before.
Because I did answer your question - and beyond that, your social capital with me is sub-zero.
Yes, I did - and if you were a character with even a modicum of respect, you'd act with a bit of courtesy. You weren't owed an answer - you got one - and that's where it ends.No you didn't.
You've been proven wrong consistently on bitcoin since 2017 - it seems you haven't gotten over that yet.Please, prove me wrong.
precisely.WolfeTone said:For now, the BOHA argument is dead. It has zero value. It is worthless.
I posted an observation about Bitcoin. You made 3 references to viewpoints I did not make. When I asked you to back them up, you accuse me of being disingenuous. It looks the other way round to me..I know you're being disingenuous here and trying to add fuel to the fire
So that's a no then? Make assertions about people without backing it up....how do you honestly expect people to take you seriously then??As per previous discussions ..I'm not going trawling through previous posts to find them).
You are the one asserting 3 times in the past 24 hours things I have not said. The onus is on you I'm afraid.If you'd like to correct me on it, go on ahead - perhaps you've had a change of heart.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?