7 ms·

I guess we have to deal with a bunch of this kind of reporting again now that BTC is recovering its value. While I’m certainly no fan of the environmental impa

by ericd 3y ago

I guess we have to deal with a bunch of this kind of reporting again now that BTC is recovering its value. While I’m certainly no fan of the environmental impact Bitcoin had in its last bull run, I like Lyn Alden’s point that having access to a stable banking system and a currency that isn’t subject to massive devaluation at the whims of your government is a luxury that many of us enjoy, but that many in the rest of the world do not. Many are stuck saving in currencies that could have their values wrecked at almost any time, in bank accounts that could realistically be frozen or drained by their governments unilaterally with little recourse, especially if they’re a suspected dissident. Obviously, BTC’s value is far from stable, but its future value is at least not certain to be much lower, and it gives people an escape hatch from almost certain financial repression, basically being forced by their government to fall back the financial ladder that they’ve been working for a large portion of their lives to climb up.

pdpi 3y ago
You just described why I entered the space, and for a while I was proud to say that were actually catering to those needs. Unfortunately, the whole industry has turned into get rich quick schemes and investment toys for rich kids.
andsoitis 3y ago
> stable banking system and a currency that isn’t subject to massive devaluation at the whims of your government In practice, BTC value is more volatile than currencies in advanced economies, no?
- npoc 3y ago
  Only in the short term. Holding for at least 4 years sees you through the "price discovery" noise while it's growing
  - PoignardAzur 3y ago
    Yeah, I feel like "your 4-figures investment will eventually start growing again after years (unless the bubble pops for good)" isn't what people are thinking of when they hear about bringing stable banking to impoverished countries.
    - npoc 3y ago
      “If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.” ― Satoshi Nakamoto
      - PoignardAzur 3y ago
        Yeah, "I'm too important to lower myself to debate with you" doesn't really inspire confidence in the whole bringing-stable-banking-to-impoverished-countries agenda either, sorry. I do love that your response to a fairly mild objection was "oh no, we don't allow critical thought unless you already agree with us". That attitude sure seems like a microcosm of the ecosystem, hence why it's so filled with naked scams and people running with the money.
        npoc 3y ago
        No self importance. You called it a bubble, but the subject is simply so broad and deep that I won't be able to convince you otherwise in the comments section of a forum. For most people it involves turning their world view on its head. If you're truly interested in understanding, listen to the full "What is money: Saylor series" by Robert Breedlove, which is a good introduction. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2jAZ0x9H0bQFY6wIbQfnrnIlqMcSHd6X https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2jAZ0x9H0bQFY6wIbQfn...
        PoignardAzur 3y ago
        Fine, remove the "bubble" part. The idea that bitcoin is fine if you can afford to not touch your savings for a few years is incompatible with the idea it's a viable alternative to national currencies in unstable countries.
- ericd 3y ago
  Yeah, I’m saying that most people here seem to live in those advanced economies where banking works pretty well, and so they think it’s totally useless because it’s useless for them. If they can get dollars, that’s maybe a reasonable substitute, and I’ve heard that USD stablecoins are popular in those places as well.
aacid 3y ago
When reports like this come up the counterargument is always FIAT bad tha is why we need bitcoin. But why compare bitcoin to fiat and not to other cryptocurrencies? There are many that don't need such enormous amounts of energy to work. Why not use them in stead of bitcoin?
- sMarsIntruder 3y ago
  Because the other cryptocurrencies are actually shitcoins and scams. I know that this statement is bold and makes people angry especially in the first world, but using the financial system as reference there are many reports out there of funds explaining why Bitcoin is the only “crypto” that will outlive, and that Proof Of Stake is basically and oligarchy scam system. So using a slang, this is not anymore a “trust me bro” argumentation.
  - injeolmi_love 3y ago
    Bitcoin is more centralized than some proof of stake chains. Just 3-5 pools control almost all of the hashrate. Many popular proof of stake chains have 20-50 validators, and some have thousands. Proof of stake is proven to be more decentralized than Bitcoin - except in cases like Ethereum which are similarly centralized.
    - sMarsIntruder 3y ago
      IMHO, You have a wrong idea of what decentralisation means. - light validator nodes, more than 50ks around the world - no foundations, CEOs, companies behind - proposals based on BIP - miners don’t own the chain since rules are based on nodes (except some quick activations in the past for segwit and taproot) - no premining - the only one truly censorship resistant (stratum v2) - I could go on and on and on But yes, I agree with you on the mining pools topic.
      - injeolmi_love 3y ago
        Why don’t Bitcoin maxis prefer Monero? It seems you get better decentralization plus a more private digital gold and something that’s much more similar to p2p cash than Bitcoin, without needing a proof of stake chain.

by ericd 3y ago

pdpi 3y ago

You just described why I entered the space, and for a while I was proud to say that were actually catering to those needs. Unfortunately, the whole industry has turned into get rich quick schemes and investment toys for rich kids.

andsoitis 3y ago

> stable banking system and a currency that isn’t subject to massive devaluation at the whims of your government In practice, BTC value is more volatile than currencies in advanced economies, no?

npoc 3y ago
Only in the short term. Holding for at least 4 years sees you through the "price discovery" noise while it's growing
- PoignardAzur 3y ago
  Yeah, I feel like "your 4-figures investment will eventually start growing again after years (unless the bubble pops for good)" isn't what people are thinking of when they hear about bringing stable banking to impoverished countries.
  - npoc 3y ago
    “If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.” ― Satoshi Nakamoto
    - PoignardAzur 3y ago
      Yeah, "I'm too important to lower myself to debate with you" doesn't really inspire confidence in the whole bringing-stable-banking-to-impoverished-countries agenda either, sorry. I do love that your response to a fairly mild objection was "oh no, we don't allow critical thought unless you already agree with us". That attitude sure seems like a microcosm of the ecosystem, hence why it's so filled with naked scams and people running with the money.
      - npoc 3y ago
        No self importance. You called it a bubble, but the subject is simply so broad and deep that I won't be able to convince you otherwise in the comments section of a forum. For most people it involves turning their world view on its head. If you're truly interested in understanding, listen to the full "What is money: Saylor series" by Robert Breedlove, which is a good introduction. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2jAZ0x9H0bQFY6wIbQfnrnIlqMcSHd6X https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2jAZ0x9H0bQFY6wIbQfn...
        PoignardAzur 3y ago
        Fine, remove the "bubble" part. The idea that bitcoin is fine if you can afford to not touch your savings for a few years is incompatible with the idea it's a viable alternative to national currencies in unstable countries.
ericd 3y ago
Yeah, I’m saying that most people here seem to live in those advanced economies where banking works pretty well, and so they think it’s totally useless because it’s useless for them. If they can get dollars, that’s maybe a reasonable substitute, and I’ve heard that USD stablecoins are popular in those places as well.

aacid 3y ago

When reports like this come up the counterargument is always FIAT bad tha is why we need bitcoin. But why compare bitcoin to fiat and not to other cryptocurrencies? There are many that don't need such enormous amounts of energy to work. Why not use them in stead of bitcoin?

sMarsIntruder 3y ago
Because the other cryptocurrencies are actually shitcoins and scams. I know that this statement is bold and makes people angry especially in the first world, but using the financial system as reference there are many reports out there of funds explaining why Bitcoin is the only “crypto” that will outlive, and that Proof Of Stake is basically and oligarchy scam system. So using a slang, this is not anymore a “trust me bro” argumentation.
- injeolmi_love 3y ago
  Bitcoin is more centralized than some proof of stake chains. Just 3-5 pools control almost all of the hashrate. Many popular proof of stake chains have 20-50 validators, and some have thousands. Proof of stake is proven to be more decentralized than Bitcoin - except in cases like Ethereum which are similarly centralized.
  - sMarsIntruder 3y ago
    IMHO, You have a wrong idea of what decentralisation means. - light validator nodes, more than 50ks around the world - no foundations, CEOs, companies behind - proposals based on BIP - miners don’t own the chain since rules are based on nodes (except some quick activations in the past for segwit and taproot) - no premining - the only one truly censorship resistant (stratum v2) - I could go on and on and on But yes, I agree with you on the mining pools topic.
    - injeolmi_love 3y ago
      Why don’t Bitcoin maxis prefer Monero? It seems you get better decentralization plus a more private digital gold and something that’s much more similar to p2p cash than Bitcoin, without needing a proof of stake chain.