3 ms·

I am glad the ft audience think BTC is a bad idea. They are mostly well-off elite in developed countries. Bitcoin is meant to erode their power.

jacknews 5y ago
LOL, you mean shift power to a different (for now) elite. Bitcoin ownership is even more concentrated than the real financial system.
- jonathan-adly 5y ago
  1. With exchanges, non-self custody solutions, and smart early adopters splitting their ownership in many wallets, no one knows the concentration of Bitcoin. 2. I much prefer the crypto dons of Lebanon[0] as the new elite than the old white guys currently running the shows. Bernie Madoff was literally the chairman of NASDAQ. 3. No one says Bitcoin will eliminate the elites, nope. Just erode the power of the current elites, where they made it via financial engineering, wars, and oil. [0]https://restofworld.org/2021/the-cryptocurrency-dons-of-beirut/ https://restofworld.org/2021/the-cryptocurrency-dons-of-beir...
- ur-whale 5y ago
  > Bitcoin ownership is even more concentrated than the real financial system. The concentration of Bitcoin ownership and the service that Bitcoin provides to humanity (please do everyone a favor and don't re-post one of the 100 lame arguments present in the thread as to why there isn't any) are completely orthogonal, especially given the fact that a Bitcoin can be divided into 10^8 pieces.
  - jacknews 5y ago
    Your argument makes no sense. I'm not saying crypto is useless, for mainstream activity, though I personally incline toward that conclusion, awaiting proof otherwise. But I am saying it concentrates wealth, even more than the existing financial system. How does the very small tradable unit have any bearing on concentration of ownership? How does 'service to humanity' justify a concentration of wealth, which itself is a dis-service to humanity?

3 ms·

I am glad the ft audience think BTC is a bad idea. They are mostly well-off elite in developed countries. Bitcoin is meant to erode their power.

by jonathan-adly 5y ago

jacknews 5y ago
LOL, you mean shift power to a different (for now) elite. Bitcoin ownership is even more concentrated than the real financial system.
- jonathan-adly 5y ago
  1. With exchanges, non-self custody solutions, and smart early adopters splitting their ownership in many wallets, no one knows the concentration of Bitcoin. 2. I much prefer the crypto dons of Lebanon[0] as the new elite than the old white guys currently running the shows. Bernie Madoff was literally the chairman of NASDAQ. 3. No one says Bitcoin will eliminate the elites, nope. Just erode the power of the current elites, where they made it via financial engineering, wars, and oil. [0]https://restofworld.org/2021/the-cryptocurrency-dons-of-beirut/ https://restofworld.org/2021/the-cryptocurrency-dons-of-beir...
- ur-whale 5y ago
  > Bitcoin ownership is even more concentrated than the real financial system. The concentration of Bitcoin ownership and the service that Bitcoin provides to humanity (please do everyone a favor and don't re-post one of the 100 lame arguments present in the thread as to why there isn't any) are completely orthogonal, especially given the fact that a Bitcoin can be divided into 10^8 pieces.
  - jacknews 5y ago
    Your argument makes no sense. I'm not saying crypto is useless, for mainstream activity, though I personally incline toward that conclusion, awaiting proof otherwise. But I am saying it concentrates wealth, even more than the existing financial system. How does the very small tradable unit have any bearing on concentration of ownership? How does 'service to humanity' justify a concentration of wealth, which itself is a dis-service to humanity?