I, for one, trust hand written warnings from “Low Quality Facts” account
My teachers always told me that handwriting is more personal than typing, so that check out!
Tattoos are the most personal though
I think it’s just a heartwarming thought
In my economics 101 gen ed course back in college, I remember a story about some society somewhere that used boulders as currency. But they were such a pain to lug around that often times they wouldn’t move them. They’d just keep track of who owned which boulders. “I’ll give you one boulder for a cow.” “Ok, it’s a deal.” “Cool, cool. The boulder over in so-and-so’s field is your now. Pleasure doing business with you.”
There was even a case where someone tried to transport a boulder across a lake but the boat sank midway and the boulder ended up on the lakebed under many feet of water. But they kept exchanging the boulder as currency for goods and services.
I’m imagining a dystopian Idiocracy-like future where Bitcoin has deleted itself, but people still trade seed phrases on slips of paper or pressed into metal plates with a “there’s 7 whole Bitcoins in this wallet. Trust me bro.”
“I’ll give you one boulder for a cow.” “Ok, it’s a deal.” “Cool, cool. The boulder over in so-and-so’s field is your now. Pleasure doing business with you.”
This is how gold standard currencies work (or used to work). Most western currencies like the US dollar used to be permanently pegged to a specific value of gold kept in national treasuries (the Bretton-Woods system), and the dollar was meant to be redeemable for this gold. But because of the impracticality of handling and storing actual physical metals actual trade was almost never handled in gold.
In reality, the US financial system already kind of runs like your “dystopian future”, and has done so since 1971. There is no inherent value to a US dollar besides the federal government saying “trust me bro”.
Hey they just audited fort Knox back in 1953 and it was all good no reason to go poking around.
do you have the graph? gotta show the graph.
I think you just accidentally created conventional money again
I believe you’re referring to Rai stones:
There was actually a crypto named after those called RaiBlocks but it’s called Nano now.
Named after giant stonework, changed to a label that means very small. Hmmmm.
It’s very close to how fiat currency works IRL.
How about a society that trades and exchanges goods and services for boulders … and an infinite number of imaginary boulders that don’t exist at all.
You’d record the transfer by adding it to the rockchain?
The Triganic Pu is a unit of galactic currency, with an exchange rate of eight Ningis to one Pu. This is simple enough, but, since a Ningi is a triangular rubber coin six thousand eight hundred miles along each side, no one has ever collected enough to own one Pu. Ningis are not negotiable currency, because the Galactibanks refuse to deal in fiddling small change.
Funny, I was thinking about the point where the Golgafrinchams on Earth adopted the leaf as currency and then burned down all the forests to control inflation.
“This note is redeemable in boulders”
I doubt this is true, but it sure would be funny.
This is not true; Bitcoin is open source and you don’t have to guess whether such line is there or not.
It is not.
In theory it could be added in addition to the open source, somewhere in the build process. Not that I think that, but it could.
Only if every btc node used this binary but because it’s decentralized theres multiple people compiling the source so the affected binary would not be affected.
In centralized software something like this is way easier. VSCode for example adds proprietary telemetry on top of their open source code and because most people downloads from the website instead of compiling, they ended up using a software that diverges the source code implementation. But even in this case you could use Codium that implements the source code version.
Mostly likely isn’t, I follow the account. Most of the time they post very obviously outlandish fake facts, sometimes smaller fake facts and sometimes innane ridiculous real facts. That’s their gimmick “low quality”.
Please tell me someone here can point out the actual source for this fun fact.
I think it’s made up.
People would just go on the internet and tell ties? I don’t believe you.
I made up the fact that it was made up.
That’s true. I know, because I made up you.
… dad? Did you get the milk?
Removed by mod
:(
If you look closely, “Low Quality Facts” is the source.
that could be most things that have to do with crypto
“trust me bro”
April first.
It is an absolute lie
Even if true. Bitcoin isn’t Bitcoin anymore. That’s why there’s BTC classic and so on.
Yeah. I fail to see how it could even be true on a conceptual level.
If it were true, what would happen on that day, or probably a few days prior, is that there would be many new Bitcoin forks that use the same transaction history (and thus the same balances) as Bitcoin. After possibly a short scramble and chaos, one or potentially multiple of those forks would then be seen as the Bitcoin while the rest fade to obscurity.
Cryptocurrencies, especially big ones, fork all the time. All it takes is an individual who wants to make a fork. Yes, that means if you have any currency on that chain before the fork, you’ll have that same amount on both currencies after the fork. In the rare case where both blockchains after the fork hold any value/respect though, this gets EXTREMELY funny if someone had an NFT on that chain before the fork. Now they have two NFTs (one on each side of the split) and could sell them to separate people, or keep one and sell one, etc.
For clarity: when I wrote “fork” above I was talking about “hard forks” specifically.
The NFT thing, could that be considered fraud.
Probably not since whatever marketplace it’s on would either only use the majority fork or explicitly specify which you are buying on.
This guy forks
I prefer Diet BTC or BTC Zero.
I’m more of a Cherry BTC type
Vanilla BTC is to die for
Remember when they made New BTC and everyone hated it?
Bitcoin is still Bitcoin. Bitcoin classic, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin gold… All are just garbage scams forking off Bitcoin
Dear God, Cthulhu, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Shiva, Tiny Baby Jesus in His crib
All I ask for the next 2 years is universal healthcare, Henry Kissinger to die an embarrassing death, and this to be true
I like your wishlist! The fact nobody mentions that the devil still lives among us is sad. I hope he gets accidentally castrated by a dull knife in times square during the live NYE broadcast.
One can only hope
Even worse fate for cryptobros than Bitcoin deleting itself: people actually realizing that digital hashes don’t have real value.
Real money is backed by a country’s respective economy - its an IOU from the government
Bitcoin is an IOU backed by nothing
That’s pretty rudimentary but it explains it
Real money is backed by a country’s respective economy
True.
its an IOU from the government
False.
An IOU from the government is a bond.
I understand that’s a bond
The dollar is representative of the work you contributed to the economy
Zimbabwe fucking enters the chat
And NFT’s are the receipts.
Mind you this applies to regular money too.
No, you can use regular money to pay taxes and demand that it be accepted for all debts private and public. The same isn’t true of Bitcoin
Oh you can definitely demand people take your bitcoin. You’ll just look like a huge twat while doing so and people will rightfully laugh at you ;)
Well maybe you can but I don’t have a mall katana ;)
All cryptocurrency isn’t stiricrly based off of magic and mysterious bitcoin code.
Even if there was code that made the coin erase itself, it would have been found and fixed (or abandoned for a new and better blockchain coin a’la Ethereum or Monero).
God I wish
If it were true it’d be removed before then anyway.
Yup. This is the basis for a trustless system - you can reasonably bank on the idea that, if there were some self-deletion clause, a bunch of people with vested interests would go ‘huh. let’s change that so that our bitcoin still has value.’
“cOdE iS lAw” “uNcHaNgAbLe”
For anyone who is interested here is a report from Fidelity that provides a fairly concise analysis of Bitcoin and it’s value proposition.
I encourage everyone to take the time to read at least the first few pages, I think you’ll be surprised by what you find.
The report doesn’t seem to address any of the most damning arguments I’ve heard against crypto currently. Namely:
- Bitcoin is mostly just a vehicle for speculation and is too slow and expensive to be considered for actual commerce
- Nothing about crypto directly solves any of the existing problems with currency, since the problems are social structures and financial incentives brought about as an emergent property of organizations and are not a function of the currency itself (some of the biggest holders of crypto are the same huge investment agencies that created the subprime loan crash in '08)
- The fact that blockchains are enormously inefficient, given that unfathomable amounts of redundant work are being done (Visa uses about 1.5 Wh per transaction vs BTC which is about 1,500-2000 kWh, making BTC over one million times less efficient)
In my opinion, there’s a reason why you haven’t been able to do anything with your Crypto besides bet on it for over a decade now. It’s because it’s just a bad product, engineered by techbros who think they know better than the global banking system how to create a decent financial product.
What you are saying is inaccurate…
-
BTC has a performant layer 2 called lightning. And if layer 2s are not your jam, there are plenty of L1s that can handle 1000s of transactions per second
-
Crypto solves the problem of having a central bank control the money supply. Also having private organizations controlling digital payment rails. Provides options or underbanked people in countries with unstable financial systems. I could go on…
-
Blockchains do not use an enormous amount of energy. You are thinking of the consensus mechanism used by proof of work cryptocurrencies. There are alternative consensus mechanisms that use much less energy
Also the adoption rates are not a measure of utility. The Linux desktop has been around 30 years and has an adoption rate under 5 percent. Mastodon has not grown as fast as twitter did. Democracy is not used by the majority of governments and where it is, voter turnout is low.
Is it also your opinion that these things are bad products?
Decentralized systems just take longer to mature. It’s crazy to me that fediverse users don’t understand this.
It’s not crazy. You are just shouting into the Gartner trough of disillusionment. Statistics favor an angry opinionated mob currently. I don’t know what the time line is (or I’d be rich) but eventually the response to this sort of comment will move away from grunt and downvote.
deleted by creator
With Bitcoin it is simply impossible. And generally there’s a blockchain trilemma - it should be fast, decentralized and secure, and you can’t make a blockchain that is all three. Bitcoin reasonably sacrifices “fast”, Lightning sacrifices “decentralized”, and so on.
I think the reason s lot of people don’t think crypto is a useful currency is because they’ve tried to use it to buy drugs and the process is awkward, slow, incredibly expensive, and messy.
There are so many little steps where someone else takes a cut of your money and waiting to see if the transaction goes through is agonisingly long. When buying weed it’s understandable but no one is going to accept that for anything where there’s other options.
deleted by creator
I like the idea behind decentralised currency and I value the ideals of those wanting to free themselves from the four or five financial institutions controlling the world, but the people who want to buy groceries with their Bitcoin are a tiny minority. Cryptocurrency has become a vessel for speculation, fraud, and money laundering, abusing the good intentions of its inventors.
During the Bitcoin hype, some online stores actually started taking cryptocurrency as payment, but few stores still have that option available. For a sweet, short period there was a glimpse of hope for cryptocurrency, but that quickly collapsed.
Your first point accentuates that there are too many options to transfer blockchain money for most normal people. Living in a place where payment terminals in supermarkets don’t accept credit cards (debit card based culture) and where banks decided to go with Maestro rather than Mastercard, I can tell you from experience that “you need to pay with a different thing here” will confuse the hell out of people.
Your second point is actually the problem behind cryptocurrency that’ll make it impossible to use as a real currency. There are no control mechanisms, so the value jumps around wildly. You’d be smart to store your money through cryptocurrencies in countries with explosive inflation (Argentina, Turkey) but when a country’s currency starts to collapse, limits to exchanging money are often the first policies to get inflation back under control, so there’s a real risk you’ll end up unable to access your money because banks suddenly refuse to take your return transfer.
Your third point is kind of invalidated by the fact you default to naming Lightning as your primary fast transaction mechanism, since it operates on Bitcoin which is stuck in the PoW world and probably always will be. It’s major competitor Ethereum is kind of okay these days, but gas prices make it useless for doing any real payments so you’ll end up using some kind of wrapper for that too.
You can’t compare a form of government to a product, so I’m not sure what the democracy argument is about.
And let’s be honest, for mainstream consumers, the Linux desktop and the Fediverse are failures. How many of your real life friends and family have a Lemmy account compared to Facebook or Twitter? Even within my tech nerd bubble most people stick with mainstream services and mainstream operating systems. The best thing to happen to the Linux desktop was Valve picking it up and stuffing it into a console. Android deserves an honorable mention, but they way that got Linux into the mainstream was to hide Linux as much as possible. Twitter started collapsing and Bluesky and fucking Threads ate Mastodon’s lunch. The Fediverse sure has grown, but unless you’re into Linux or computers, you won’t find a Twitter or even Reddit alternative here.
Even still, I myself can get my social media itch scratched by the Fediverse, but I still can’t pay for my groceries through Dogecoin or Lightning or Ethereum.
There are also reasons why I’m not planning on using an iteration of cryptocurrency for real life finances even if such a thing becomes available. Most importantly, the public payment history associated with wallets. It’s not exactly difficult to link wallets to companies once they start operating at larger scales and soon enough you’ll have companies selling your payment history (and wage/employer history) straight off the blockchain. Unfortunately, that’s not really something that can be fixed with the current model.
There’s also the theft problem: if someone steals my bank account details and uses it to transfer all of my money to a foreign country, my bank will lock down my account and probably call me. Steal my wallet seed phrase and everything is gone in an instant, with no recourse. This adds major risk to keeping any significant amount of money in cryptocurrency form, and both enthusiasts and professionals have lost millions upon billions this way.
And let’s be honest, for mainstream consumers, the Linux desktop and the Fediverse are failures.
My point is that just because something doesn’t achieve widespread adoption immediately does not mean it is a failure. I use both Linux desktop and the Fediverse and the fact that they are not in widespread use doesn’t rob them of virtue for the people that use them. Technology adoption is a complex thing and its incredibly reductionist to just say "crypto has been around for a decade and a half and you still can’t use it for anything therefore its a failure. Our legacy financial system is very entrenched and its not to going to unseated overnight. These things take time.
Ultimately I think it should come down to consumer choice, those that prefer centralized finance should use that and those that are OK with the added overheard of decentralized finance should be able to have that choice. That is why I make the analogy to these other systems. Linux desktop for a long time was harder to use but it was worth it for people whose values aligned with open source software. Crypto has a similar trajectory and faces similar uphill battles including negative attitudes from those using competing systems. But for those who value what it provides, it is worth it.
🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓
Dude makes shitty argument to propel position that is wrong
Dude is disproven by someone more experienced in the field
Everyone: 🤓🤓🤓 What a toxic nerd
-
Do you not have stores that let you pay with bitcoin and other crypto? It’s a thing in Canada atleast.
There are but virtually no one uses them, and I’m sure if they did they would take it away the due to the aforementioned issues. It’s just kind of a mess. It’s not not a good vehicle for commerce and it never has been.
Weird that it works in other places…
It works as a marketing strategy to virtue signal to tech fetishists, but nearly no one actually uses these services.
Can I see your statistics on Crypto POS that you used to come to those conclusions?
Starbucks accepts crypto just so you are aware, it’s far more common than you are leading people to believe.
Then please provide evidence that these services are actually being used if you are so
confusedconvinced that is the case.
There’s some in the US too.
Considering the volatility of Bitcoin, those store owners are nuts.
Why it coverts to cash at the POS machine and they are paid in cash?
Again, volatility. When the price isn’t stable, you could lose massively.
It doesn’t matter in the sightest…. If it takes 5 bitcoins or .5 bitcoins the shop still gets their $1.50 for a coffee minus their fee…
I’m sorry you can’t comprehend how this system works and is viable in lots of places.
If 5 bitcoins is suddenly worth 3 bitcoins, the exchange rate will change and the company will lose money. It’s a major gamble.
Domt come to lemmy with actual facts, it’s no better than Reddit in this regard. It’s almost like it’s a society issue.
I feel like Lemmy is small enough that my comments might make a small difference lol.
I’m happy to briefly address those for you. For starters I’m only referring to Bitcoin, and not other “crypto”.
- The base layer is indeed “to slow and expensive” to make day to day purchases such as coffee. However layer 2 applications built on top of the base layer, such as the lighting network, enable nearly instant transactions extremely cheaply.
- Bitcoin solves many problems with existing currencies, all you have to do is look to countries with failed economic systems. Or the billion people around the world who lack access to even the most basic financial services, such as banking. You may not see a use for it but people living under failed regimes do.
- This is much more complicated and it’s difficult to explain the advantages of securing a monetary system with energy in a concise way so I’ll instead say this. The energy necessary to secure the network is indeed a cost, but without a complete understanding of Bitcoin you cannot evaluate if it is outweighed by the benefits. Of course I believe the benefits far outweigh the cost.
Hopefully that helps.
I fail to see how crypto or BTC alleviates the problems with fiat that exist under failed regimes. If anything I feel like it would exacerbate them given that crypto operates on a public, append-only ledger that gives disproportionate power to those that leverage their existing influence and are able to interact with the ledger in bad faith/deceptively. Empowering the
unbannedunbanked is a common talking point but I don’t see it actually becoming real outside of a few niche cases that tend to be exaggerated in crypto spaces. And even then I’m not sure those will stick around in the long run.I will believe in initiatives like the lightning network when they actually see mass adoption. I personally don’t see that happening because of the aforementioned problems. Scalability and practicality compared to existing standards being the primary ones.
Power is still an issue considering BTC uses as much electricity as a small nation despite being the hobby of a few hundred thousand people, versus the entire global banking industry which is a million times more efficient as things stand currently. I don’t think “but it’s worth it because BTC is good” is really a good counter to that. It’s not sustainable.
Also “it’s too complicated to explain” isn’t a particularly persuasive argument lol.
To add to this concern, centralized currency has its pros. Because it’s centralized, it can be governed. If I wire some money to an unintended target, sometimes that money can be recovered. There’s plenty of stories of people getting unexpected deposits into their bank accounts from their payroll company and everyone tells them to report it and not touch it.
Then there’s the Seth Green incident where he got phished and someone stole his IP rights to his bored ape. If the ape NFTs were centralized, Seth could have reported the fraud and had it returned.
How would this work at scale? Imagine if a company like Apple got their keys leaked and someone siphoned millions of currency away from them. Does Apple just take the loss? What if your grandma gets her account stolen, she just loses her retirement with no recourse?
I’m quite happy that the legal system backed by the police and military are backing up my fiat.
There’s plenty of stories of people getting unexpected deposits into their bank accounts from their payroll company and everyone tells them to report it and not touch it.
This sort of thing basically happened to me once with crypto and I literally just kept it, was great, minor miracle since I didn’t know how I was gonna pay rent that month and it was basically the full amount.
Imagine if a company like Apple got their keys leaked and someone siphoned millions of currency away from them. Does Apple just take the loss?
Yes. Realistically though big companies wanting to custody large amounts of crypto are outsourcing this to reputable third parties like Coinbase specializing in secure crypto storage. Probably have insurance on it also.
I can buy coffee with crypto at Starbucks. As well as many other store fronts.
I think proof of state solves some of the energy and efficiency issues, but I agree it’s pretty over hyped.
It is about 99% more efficient than proof of work, making it still enormously inefficient compared to traditional means. Crazy to think about!
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/QdQixEQpbAc?si=PDPL-rjk2T9Kiu_l&t=1272
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
B-b-but the internet said it’s made up and dumb! All of these institutional holders are fools!! The internet is right these professionals are wrong!!!
so it’s NOT a pyramid scheme?
or it IS a pyramid scheme, and that’s why we should get on board?
Gotta get in early so you aren’t at the bottom of the pyramid!
It’s a pyramid scheme that the old farts have already invested in, so they want it to become standard.
Bitcoin isn’t. A lot of shitcoins are.
The fact that institutional holders are some of the biggest holders is a red flag in itself given that crypto marketed itself as a solution to problematic power structures. So far it has no use other than speculative value.
That “fairly concise analysis” has way too much “gun manufacturer says guns are not a problem” energy to be trusted. Specially comming from an investment firm, which are the Masters of Scamming.
This report has no critical value, they’re trying to convince sceptic investors that bitcoin has a value as an investment. Their whole argument is that it has the qualities and potential to replace other monetary goods. There is no questions regarding how the system works, the speculation, the inequalities, etc. Looking at the state of the world and the role of capitalism in this tragedy, it feels completely disconnected to read that bitcoin is great because it could maintain the statu quo.
I also noticed that it was strikingly uncritical. Does not reivew any mass-adoption scenario, lists very few drawbacks, and seems to be a hype piece targeting individual investors.
I want proof, where’s the source code?
Due to the quality of the facts, I assume proof will be hard to find.
-deleted-
This is what we get for going to the bargain facts store
This is a satire account
source is on github but good luck finding that line for yourself
If someone says something that a lot of people want to be true with no evidence… it ain’t true.
I want that to be true. I’ll take your word for it. 😊
This would be a very banksy move if it ended up happening.
April fools!
Well there is a limit of mining, every new digit is 16 times harder to make, there are just 2 or 3 digits left.
This was made with growth and inflation in mind so the currency last like 60-80 years but they didn’t predict giant farms using entire powerplants of energy, so basically 50 years of bitcoin was shortened to the last 5. The thing is profitability as miners have to make an entire 28 bit hash at random wasting dozens of GPU in exchange of less money of what they cost so the prizes must be risen even more making it even more centralized (also lowering the price for every other holder)
This is almost poetic As bitcoin approaches its end only the top miners are allowed to continue increasing the risk of the death which is 51% attack, if some of the final miners will unite and reach 51% at this point they can cash out the entire currency and make it look that the price falls to zero.
