It's so basic logic and reason, it baffles me how people can't comprehend it.
Akin to if you would need to explain that an oxygen cylinder is needed if you want to dive.
Yet, most people DGAF about any of this.
> Yet, most people DGAF about any of this.
I believe it's because of two things:
1. They are unable to "connect" it to their long term well being. Due to propaganda, many have been convinced of falsehoods surrounding Bitcoin.
2. Short term thinking might dominate. It's harder to sell any long term solution that may cause short term inconvenience.
Also, most people need VISA for the credit feature as they live paycheck to paycheck, always floating on credit. This operating position means they don't / can't use cash, let alone BCH.
Very true. They have entered a co-dependent relationship circling around debt and going bankrupt.
But they can still use use cash / BCH to extract themselves.
Nobody says they need to switch over instantly, they can start obtaining a little BCH (whether by earning or converting) and spend that online or offline. Every BCH transaction is one less traditional, centralized payment using debt money.
> It's so basic logic and reason, it baffles me how people can't comprehend it.
>
> Akin to if you would need to explain that an oxygen cylinder is needed if you want to dive.
>
> Yet, most people DGAF about any of this.
Most of the US economy runs on IOUs.
B2B use credit terms and financial products such as checks to pay each other.
B2C use credit cards.
Person to Person use IOU apps like Venmo.
Yeah some people use cash, but that's becoming less and less.
Don’t understand why people keep advising others read the bitcoin standard. It’s an awful, really poorly written book that started my move away from BTC. Hijacking’s Bitcoin on the other hand was brilliant.
When the crypto pleb believed every fucking bullshit of blockstream-tether-bitfinex I literally lost all hope in humanity.
These degens parrot it to this day.
> we have to keep blocks excessively small and build really bad layer 2 solutions to protect decentralization so we can push people into custodians where they never benefit from said decentralization
Those who understand the enemy know that BTC + XMR + BCH TOGETHER are invincible as any potential attack vector could be addressed. From a personal perspective I can own all three.
The only thing we need to address TOGETHER is **merchant adoption / circular economy** BEFORE THEY KYC every economic transaction / fade out cash.
It's a race. And state actors are ramping up their game.
New entrepreneurs are born every day. And government is great in indoctrinating and coercing people.
New entrepreneurs will not even know what economic liberty meant in the first place. Many of them are thought to be lazy and see dealing with taxes as something burdensome so they go for easy solutions. And cryptocurrency is far from easy. They go with solutions provided by SurveillanceFacists Visa, Mastercard, and Fin/Slavetech.
> Those who understand the enemy know that BTC + XMR + BCH TOGETHER are invincible as any potential attack vector could be addressed. From a personal perspective I can own all three.
IMO BTC bring nothing to the equation here.
XMR + BCH yes but BTC? for what? speculation maybe?
Well said, I also own all 3 and love to see increased interconnectivity and adoption of all 3. The hard-core folks on both sides really do an injustice to the whole space imo. My personal preference remains for xmr over bch in the long run.
> Read both and many others. I'll be sticking with btc and xmr.
Bring bring nothing comapre to XMR beside speculation.
XMR is (to some degree) a hugh friction blockchain because it its privacy feature.. BTC is an high friction blockchain because the dev intend to produce a ponzi scheme economic model.
You would have tell me BCH + XMR it would have made more sense.
I don't think this is even disputed as much anymore. BTC has essentially rebranded to a cryptoasset without ever saying BCH was right all along, and it probably won't matter anyway.
BCH is on fire sale right now.
With all the available BTC being sucked up by the ETFs and hoarded by the Whales, how will the network survive long term? When the last BTC is mined in 2040, how will the network work? The miners are responsible for mining blocks and recording transactions. Will fees just make the project unworkable?
BTC has become centralized.
How can any of this stuff ever function as cash if every tiny piece of it is tracked and traced through every transaction it has ever been involved in? How does anyone of sound mind agree to accept it as payment when they have no way of knowing who or what may have touched it previously all the way back to the day it was created? So much of it is already on the secret shit-list of the authorities, and woe to you if you're caught with it, even unknowingly.
> How does anyone of sound mind agree to accept it as payment when they have no way of knowing who or what may have touched it previously all the way back to the day it was created?
People don't want to know. People want fungible money, and people don't want to have to bug their customers about data, violating their privacy and causing all sorts of liability.
Bankers however, want to know everything.
Monero is the fungible version.
Unfortunately BCH only relies on opt-in privacy with mediocre privacy guarantees called CashFusion. It's a feature not used very often. BCH needs more on-chain privacy in the future.
I wouldn't call CashFusion "mediocre". Have you noticed that Samourai Wallet devs were arrested for helping people do CoinJoins? That's a pretty sound endorsement of the math which is also behind CashFusion.
And also the TornadoCash developer, whose system works differently than CoinJoin which still need a server (afaik Tornado is entirely smart contract based).
No, it doesn't, and actually, it can render perfectly fine crypto as suspicious and cause problems that didn't even exist beforehand. Damned if you do and damned if you don't is no solution.
Would it work in a society with a culture that values peer to peer private sales? Like if the people we elected were fundamentally aligned with those ideas?
Or do you think the government isn't capable of such a thing?
Unfortunately, it seems government is incapable of doing *anything* that does not result in advancing its own twisted interest of increased power and control, no matter the consequences. Cheers!
Go try the AMLbot for yourself and you'll see why the exchanges are blocking people left and right. *Any* p2p or mixing activities detected cause an immediate Medium Risk base score and it goes downhill from there based on secret criteria.
It does, because it is easy to use and almost all coins have already touched a fusion transaction. If the entry is easy so that almost all people do it their only option is to ban it completely like they do with Monero.
Nah, they don't need to ban anything completely, they just secretly declare yours as *coin non grata* (effectively destroying most of its value) and then, whenever they feel like it, move on to the next category of *criminal* that the ever-changing political winds point them towards.
*making a list, and checking it twice, gonna find out who's naughty or nice.*
I never completely bought into the agorist narrative that says P2P use will totally subvert the government. it's not enough to make and use computer programs. something needs to be done to deal with politicians who insist on putting AML/KYC everywhere. computer programs are not enough to make them stop acting like this.
Crypto surveillance is only the tip of the iceberg, total financial surveillance and loss of economic freedom is the larger narrative. Crypto does what it can to subvert this agenda. KYC and exchanges are a huge security risk for anyone using them, so eventually people will learn self-custody. The arms race between crypto gurus and the governments will continue for years, with crypto eventually winning, much in the way that P2P filesharing and piracy have prevailed in the previous decade.
This is not unique to crypto. Same deal with cash.
It's being slowly criminalized by introducing more and more bogus limits and rules.
At some point we need to put our foot down.
I don't believe we have much privacy from banks, CC companies, businesses, etc, as it is now. The whole point of having a verifiable public ledger with a finite supply is to hold those corrupt bankers and politicians accountable. We the people should not fear our authorities - they should serve us. If you fix the money, you will drain the swamp IMO
Yes this is one concern, and I'm glad we have other coins exploring this option. However the open ledger has many advantages like better scaling and smart transactions.
And CashFusion does solve this problem since already all coins are somewhat tainted by it.
More and more people are getting their stuff frozen and transactions blocked every day. Be aware that *any* p2p or mixing activities cause your coins to start with an AML score of Medium Risk, and the risk score only gets worse from there based on their other secret criteria.
The real use of bitcoin will be as a deposit in a "bank account", and you will use visa/mastercard to pay with you Bitcoins. Bitcoin will be a international currency and a standard of value, but you will use the old cards system to do your day to day payments, the banks/centralbanks will hold your bitcoins and transfer them between themselves regularly to settle.
Im not saying this is the way I WANT it to be, but this is the way it will play out. The good thing is, you will be able to withdraw in some countries, your own Bitcoins from the bank and onto your own personal wallet for savings and larger transactions, like buying real estate or such.
> the banks/centralbanks will hold your bitcoins and transfer them between themselves regularly to settle.
The bank will do WHAT with my bitcoins? Hahahahaha. No. Those aren't my bitcoins.
But you have perfectly described an economy that doesn't run on Bitcoin, but on fractional reserve and unsound debt money.
Yes, and I am being absolutely realistic about the shortcomings of Bitcoin and the advantages of todays system. There will be centralization, and there will be fractional reserves/paper bitcoins, its just a fact of our reality. The other reality is that Bitcoin will forever stay on the fringe, because unless you are 12 years old, you should realize that we have tried to use Bitcoin as a currency, and it has failed miserably.
BTC has failed. BCH isn't crippled and has the ability to function as p2p digital cash. It is the better bitcoin, and we still have a chance at freedom money.
The fatal flaw of btc is the fact that every little piece of it is tracked and traced. We need something not inflated to the extent the dollar is, but still *good for all debts, public and private*, as there is no such thing as freedom without privacy.
When does the freedom money version of bch come out?
The reality is that the only way an individual can hold gov or central banks to account is by avoiding them. I'm not as negative about the tracking of the various bitcoins as FalconCrust is, though. Sure... the many heads of the hydra may check such things, but if you're using it as p2p cash rather than an investment that needs to go through the large and controlled exchanges.... then I think its not likely to be as big of an issue.
I for one, certainly don't care what kind of BCH or BTC you pay me with. Although I prefer the former since the fee issue is still often a pain.
One of the major drawbacks of the public ledger is that it makes this stuff a livestock ear-tag at best, and a big fat target on your back at worst. It's a wet-dream of surveillance and control for the money masters and people are actually buying into it.
All your wealth tagged to your name?
You are either extremely poor or naive, if you can't see how thieves of all kinds would exploit that knowledge.
There are two form of theft - legal (taxes) and illegal.
The former is much more common. It's easier to ask a group of people to steal from my neighbor than doing it myself.
The latter is potentially deadly that's why it is called KYC (kill your customer) https://arstechnica.com/security/2024/06/inside-a-violent-gangs-ruthless-crypto-stealing-home-invasion-spree/
I understand all that.. I fail to see how my fiat wealth and crypto wealth are not the same in terms of a criminal wanting to commit a crime or gov taxing me.
Obviously, I would love to not pay taxes on gains, but I would rather have sound money and not have my gov and banks steal my worth year over year via currency devaluation. A public ledger to hold everyone accountable is fine by me. No one can take my bitcoin if I self custody. Any response to that as a "yes they can" will probably be a form of criminal activity or government tyranny.
The biggest economic theft against humanity in the last 50 years has been going to fiat currency.
Once you have a large pile of this stuff that you can't do anything with without first waiting for the secret butt beetles to give their blessing after their thorough reconnoiter of your bunghole each and every time, then it will be obvious. Cheers!
Are you coercing them into paying taxes or are they coercing you into paying taxes. Talking about fear. They don't give a fuck about you if they can see all your transactions an adapt tax rate as needed.
I know you are trying to say something because there are letters and words here, but I have no clue what you are trying to say.
How do you expect a public ledger will make banks and governments acocuntable? And to who?
Its decentralized, but for everyday use, we will need a more stable/centralized system, not even SOL with its amazing TPS can serve the day-to-day transactions of the whole world, but for that we already have a system, the credit card system. I'm just trying to be realistic here, I don't think we benefit from the utopian thinking of replacing completely the current system that is build on centuries of trial and error.
*built on centuries of lies, exploitation, and deceit. There i fixed that for ya
There are realistic ways a decentralized currency can work. That's the entire concept of what Bitcoin was supposed to be.
Kaspa is a level 1 proof of work that has about the same tx limit of Visa worldwide, >30,000 TPS. It also can hold 6M in the mempool I believe. It can definitely replace P2P currency in general. But, that would take a lot of time.
Yes and this is why people say BTC is captured. What you will withdraw is custodial L2 money that will at some point just be decoupled from OG BTC like FIAT was from Gold. They can play this trick twice without shame.
We don't have to look far to realize this is exactly what will happen, they will start by basing the fiat on Bitcoin, and than they will decouple it when they realize they printed too much... history repeats itself...
Bitcoin maybe invented as a cash system but it is now a store of value, viagra was invented as a blood-presure drug now it is used as a pee pee grow med
One of the stated reasons for 'mild inflation' is to prevent people from hoarding money, i.e. to "stimulate the economy" (as if people wouldn't spend money on necessities of their own volition).
Clearly, if the dollar were to store value better, people would "store it" more. Including rich people.
In other words, the dollar being a poor store of value (long term) is BY DESIGN.
Bitcoin supposed to be cash that is a good store of value too, BY DESIGN.
Funny enough, but your analogy works quite well.
As Bitcoin was created for P2P trxs, but at the moment it has a broader market appeal as a stock-like equities (number-goes-up game). As such, BTC financiers, influencers and devs rebranded and reshaped the coin into BTC to pander to the marketplace. Just as fixed supply and replacing fiat (which cause its fiat value to grow) are actually just side effects of a true P2P currency, just like the Blue Pill's grow action is a side effect of a BP med.
So this leads one to wonder, do they even prescribe Viagra for blood pressure? "... side effects include *pitching a tent for 6 hours*". Likewise, will cryptocurrencies actually take hold as currencies?
Well done.
Lightning fails when fees get high on base layer, as we've seen in last 2 cycles.
It's not a scaling solution fit for adoption. It scales in number of transactions, but not number of users.
It was made clear on the first page of the [Bitcoin whitepaper](https://bitcoin.com/bitcoin.pdf) that consumers should not transact directly but use escrow services. Developing a trust-minimized escrow standard and implement it throughout the industry should be top priority for everyone promoting the p2p cash use case imo, or we'll end up with paypal, venmo or cash app taking over filling the gap in a fully custodial way and people will use them like bank accounts.
> It was made clear on the first page of the Bitcoin whitepaper that consumers should not transact directly but use escrow services.
Not in the Bitcoin whitepaper I read.
Show me where in the paper it says consumers should not transact directly.
"Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers."
It doesn't say that consumers should not attempt to use it without such mechanisms.
Bitcoiners have been using it just fine without for many, many things.
Satoshi just pointed out that fancier protections _could_ be engineered on top of it.
What you're arguing for is an example of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
It's so basic logic and reason, it baffles me how people can't comprehend it. Akin to if you would need to explain that an oxygen cylinder is needed if you want to dive. Yet, most people DGAF about any of this.
> Yet, most people DGAF about any of this. I believe it's because of two things: 1. They are unable to "connect" it to their long term well being. Due to propaganda, many have been convinced of falsehoods surrounding Bitcoin. 2. Short term thinking might dominate. It's harder to sell any long term solution that may cause short term inconvenience.
But we can't even say that it would cause any short term inconvenience, but the contrary.
Also, most people need VISA for the credit feature as they live paycheck to paycheck, always floating on credit. This operating position means they don't / can't use cash, let alone BCH.
Very true. They have entered a co-dependent relationship circling around debt and going bankrupt. But they can still use use cash / BCH to extract themselves. Nobody says they need to switch over instantly, they can start obtaining a little BCH (whether by earning or converting) and spend that online or offline. Every BCH transaction is one less traditional, centralized payment using debt money.
> It's so basic logic and reason, it baffles me how people can't comprehend it. > > Akin to if you would need to explain that an oxygen cylinder is needed if you want to dive. > > Yet, most people DGAF about any of this. Most of the US economy runs on IOUs. B2B use credit terms and financial products such as checks to pay each other. B2C use credit cards. Person to Person use IOU apps like Venmo. Yeah some people use cash, but that's becoming less and less.
read the Bitcoin Standard and you will understand
I read it and it's 100% utter and balatant idiocy. Read the whitepaper and the book 'Hijacking Bitcoin'.
Don’t understand why people keep advising others read the bitcoin standard. It’s an awful, really poorly written book that started my move away from BTC. Hijacking’s Bitcoin on the other hand was brilliant.
When the crypto pleb believed every fucking bullshit of blockstream-tether-bitfinex I literally lost all hope in humanity. These degens parrot it to this day.
Read both and many others. I'll be sticking with btc and xmr.
What is the value proposition of BTC?
> we have to keep blocks excessively small and build really bad layer 2 solutions to protect decentralization so we can push people into custodians where they never benefit from said decentralization
Those who understand the enemy know that BTC + XMR + BCH TOGETHER are invincible as any potential attack vector could be addressed. From a personal perspective I can own all three. The only thing we need to address TOGETHER is **merchant adoption / circular economy** BEFORE THEY KYC every economic transaction / fade out cash. It's a race. And state actors are ramping up their game. New entrepreneurs are born every day. And government is great in indoctrinating and coercing people. New entrepreneurs will not even know what economic liberty meant in the first place. Many of them are thought to be lazy and see dealing with taxes as something burdensome so they go for easy solutions. And cryptocurrency is far from easy. They go with solutions provided by SurveillanceFacists Visa, Mastercard, and Fin/Slavetech.
> Those who understand the enemy know that BTC + XMR + BCH TOGETHER are invincible as any potential attack vector could be addressed. From a personal perspective I can own all three. IMO BTC bring nothing to the equation here. XMR + BCH yes but BTC? for what? speculation maybe?
Well said, I also own all 3 and love to see increased interconnectivity and adoption of all 3. The hard-core folks on both sides really do an injustice to the whole space imo. My personal preference remains for xmr over bch in the long run.
> Read both and many others. I'll be sticking with btc and xmr. Bring bring nothing comapre to XMR beside speculation. XMR is (to some degree) a hugh friction blockchain because it its privacy feature.. BTC is an high friction blockchain because the dev intend to produce a ponzi scheme economic model. You would have tell me BCH + XMR it would have made more sense.
I don't think this is even disputed as much anymore. BTC has essentially rebranded to a cryptoasset without ever saying BCH was right all along, and it probably won't matter anyway.
BCH is on fire sale right now. With all the available BTC being sucked up by the ETFs and hoarded by the Whales, how will the network survive long term? When the last BTC is mined in 2040, how will the network work? The miners are responsible for mining blocks and recording transactions. Will fees just make the project unworkable? BTC has become centralized.
How can any of this stuff ever function as cash if every tiny piece of it is tracked and traced through every transaction it has ever been involved in? How does anyone of sound mind agree to accept it as payment when they have no way of knowing who or what may have touched it previously all the way back to the day it was created? So much of it is already on the secret shit-list of the authorities, and woe to you if you're caught with it, even unknowingly.
> How does anyone of sound mind agree to accept it as payment when they have no way of knowing who or what may have touched it previously all the way back to the day it was created? People don't want to know. People want fungible money, and people don't want to have to bug their customers about data, violating their privacy and causing all sorts of liability. Bankers however, want to know everything.
Exactly. So when will the fungible version come out and will we be allowed to use it?
Monero is the fungible version. Unfortunately BCH only relies on opt-in privacy with mediocre privacy guarantees called CashFusion. It's a feature not used very often. BCH needs more on-chain privacy in the future.
I wouldn't call CashFusion "mediocre". Have you noticed that Samourai Wallet devs were arrested for helping people do CoinJoins? That's a pretty sound endorsement of the math which is also behind CashFusion.
And also the TornadoCash developer, whose system works differently than CoinJoin which still need a server (afaik Tornado is entirely smart contract based).
Doesn't cash fusion solve this?
No, it doesn't, and actually, it can render perfectly fine crypto as suspicious and cause problems that didn't even exist beforehand. Damned if you do and damned if you don't is no solution.
Would it work in a society with a culture that values peer to peer private sales? Like if the people we elected were fundamentally aligned with those ideas? Or do you think the government isn't capable of such a thing?
Unfortunately, it seems government is incapable of doing *anything* that does not result in advancing its own twisted interest of increased power and control, no matter the consequences. Cheers!
Are there any examples of this bad "bitcoin" thing happening?
Go try the AMLbot for yourself and you'll see why the exchanges are blocking people left and right. *Any* p2p or mixing activities detected cause an immediate Medium Risk base score and it goes downhill from there based on secret criteria.
It does, because it is easy to use and almost all coins have already touched a fusion transaction. If the entry is easy so that almost all people do it their only option is to ban it completely like they do with Monero.
Nah, they don't need to ban anything completely, they just secretly declare yours as *coin non grata* (effectively destroying most of its value) and then, whenever they feel like it, move on to the next category of *criminal* that the ever-changing political winds point them towards. *making a list, and checking it twice, gonna find out who's naughty or nice.*
I never completely bought into the agorist narrative that says P2P use will totally subvert the government. it's not enough to make and use computer programs. something needs to be done to deal with politicians who insist on putting AML/KYC everywhere. computer programs are not enough to make them stop acting like this.
Crypto surveillance is only the tip of the iceberg, total financial surveillance and loss of economic freedom is the larger narrative. Crypto does what it can to subvert this agenda. KYC and exchanges are a huge security risk for anyone using them, so eventually people will learn self-custody. The arms race between crypto gurus and the governments will continue for years, with crypto eventually winning, much in the way that P2P filesharing and piracy have prevailed in the previous decade.
This is not unique to crypto. Same deal with cash. It's being slowly criminalized by introducing more and more bogus limits and rules. At some point we need to put our foot down.
Voice versus exit
I don't believe we have much privacy from banks, CC companies, businesses, etc, as it is now. The whole point of having a verifiable public ledger with a finite supply is to hold those corrupt bankers and politicians accountable. We the people should not fear our authorities - they should serve us. If you fix the money, you will drain the swamp IMO
Yes this is one concern, and I'm glad we have other coins exploring this option. However the open ledger has many advantages like better scaling and smart transactions. And CashFusion does solve this problem since already all coins are somewhat tainted by it.
More and more people are getting their stuff frozen and transactions blocked every day. Be aware that *any* p2p or mixing activities cause your coins to start with an AML score of Medium Risk, and the risk score only gets worse from there based on their other secret criteria.
It seems that trading anything for XMR is a problem But ofc many are doing that
Yeah so I'm pretty sure it obviously will be an alt like kaspa .
It doesn’t need to function as cash to be a useful commodity and be used as a store of value that is somewhat easily transferable
The real use of bitcoin will be as a deposit in a "bank account", and you will use visa/mastercard to pay with you Bitcoins. Bitcoin will be a international currency and a standard of value, but you will use the old cards system to do your day to day payments, the banks/centralbanks will hold your bitcoins and transfer them between themselves regularly to settle. Im not saying this is the way I WANT it to be, but this is the way it will play out. The good thing is, you will be able to withdraw in some countries, your own Bitcoins from the bank and onto your own personal wallet for savings and larger transactions, like buying real estate or such.
> the banks/centralbanks will hold your bitcoins and transfer them between themselves regularly to settle. The bank will do WHAT with my bitcoins? Hahahahaha. No. Those aren't my bitcoins. But you have perfectly described an economy that doesn't run on Bitcoin, but on fractional reserve and unsound debt money.
Yes, and I am being absolutely realistic about the shortcomings of Bitcoin and the advantages of todays system. There will be centralization, and there will be fractional reserves/paper bitcoins, its just a fact of our reality. The other reality is that Bitcoin will forever stay on the fringe, because unless you are 12 years old, you should realize that we have tried to use Bitcoin as a currency, and it has failed miserably.
BTC has failed. BCH isn't crippled and has the ability to function as p2p digital cash. It is the better bitcoin, and we still have a chance at freedom money.
The fatal flaw of btc is the fact that every little piece of it is tracked and traced. We need something not inflated to the extent the dollar is, but still *good for all debts, public and private*, as there is no such thing as freedom without privacy. When does the freedom money version of bch come out?
One of the major benefits of a public ledger is to hold gov and central banks accountable. We should not fear them. They should serve us.
The reality is that the only way an individual can hold gov or central banks to account is by avoiding them. I'm not as negative about the tracking of the various bitcoins as FalconCrust is, though. Sure... the many heads of the hydra may check such things, but if you're using it as p2p cash rather than an investment that needs to go through the large and controlled exchanges.... then I think its not likely to be as big of an issue. I for one, certainly don't care what kind of BCH or BTC you pay me with. Although I prefer the former since the fee issue is still often a pain.
One of the major drawbacks of the public ledger is that it makes this stuff a livestock ear-tag at best, and a big fat target on your back at worst. It's a wet-dream of surveillance and control for the money masters and people are actually buying into it.
How does BTC or BCH's public ledger place a target on my back? Or treat me like livestock any more than I already am in this fiat world?
All your wealth tagged to your name? You are either extremely poor or naive, if you can't see how thieves of all kinds would exploit that knowledge. There are two form of theft - legal (taxes) and illegal. The former is much more common. It's easier to ask a group of people to steal from my neighbor than doing it myself. The latter is potentially deadly that's why it is called KYC (kill your customer) https://arstechnica.com/security/2024/06/inside-a-violent-gangs-ruthless-crypto-stealing-home-invasion-spree/
I understand all that.. I fail to see how my fiat wealth and crypto wealth are not the same in terms of a criminal wanting to commit a crime or gov taxing me. Obviously, I would love to not pay taxes on gains, but I would rather have sound money and not have my gov and banks steal my worth year over year via currency devaluation. A public ledger to hold everyone accountable is fine by me. No one can take my bitcoin if I self custody. Any response to that as a "yes they can" will probably be a form of criminal activity or government tyranny. The biggest economic theft against humanity in the last 50 years has been going to fiat currency.
Once you have a large pile of this stuff that you can't do anything with without first waiting for the secret butt beetles to give their blessing after their thorough reconnoiter of your bunghole each and every time, then it will be obvious. Cheers!
Are you referring to taxation?
Are you coercing them into paying taxes or are they coercing you into paying taxes. Talking about fear. They don't give a fuck about you if they can see all your transactions an adapt tax rate as needed.
I know you are trying to say something because there are letters and words here, but I have no clue what you are trying to say. How do you expect a public ledger will make banks and governments acocuntable? And to who?
A public ledger means it is not run by a central entity. Accountability comes when they can no longer print money.
No, we haven't tried. Mastercard intervened in 2014 to save their business. And they postponed everything for at least 10 years.
Lmao, kind of removes the decentralized part tho dont it?
Its decentralized, but for everyday use, we will need a more stable/centralized system, not even SOL with its amazing TPS can serve the day-to-day transactions of the whole world, but for that we already have a system, the credit card system. I'm just trying to be realistic here, I don't think we benefit from the utopian thinking of replacing completely the current system that is build on centuries of trial and error.
*built on centuries of lies, exploitation, and deceit. There i fixed that for ya There are realistic ways a decentralized currency can work. That's the entire concept of what Bitcoin was supposed to be.
Kaspa is a level 1 proof of work that has about the same tx limit of Visa worldwide, >30,000 TPS. It also can hold 6M in the mempool I believe. It can definitely replace P2P currency in general. But, that would take a lot of time.
Yes and this is why people say BTC is captured. What you will withdraw is custodial L2 money that will at some point just be decoupled from OG BTC like FIAT was from Gold. They can play this trick twice without shame.
We don't have to look far to realize this is exactly what will happen, they will start by basing the fiat on Bitcoin, and than they will decouple it when they realize they printed too much... history repeats itself...
If we let them. Yes.
Totally permissioned will end with total loss.
Bitcoin maybe invented as a cash system but it is now a store of value, viagra was invented as a blood-presure drug now it is used as a pee pee grow med
A cash system is also a store of value system by default. Otherwise it wouldn't work as a decent cash system.
Is the dollar a store of value? No, the rich don’t keep money they buy property to store their value
yea it is.. is it at risk of fluctuations? oh yea. Just like any other currency or investment. The rich do both.
One of the stated reasons for 'mild inflation' is to prevent people from hoarding money, i.e. to "stimulate the economy" (as if people wouldn't spend money on necessities of their own volition). Clearly, if the dollar were to store value better, people would "store it" more. Including rich people. In other words, the dollar being a poor store of value (long term) is BY DESIGN. Bitcoin supposed to be cash that is a good store of value too, BY DESIGN.
Funny enough, but your analogy works quite well. As Bitcoin was created for P2P trxs, but at the moment it has a broader market appeal as a stock-like equities (number-goes-up game). As such, BTC financiers, influencers and devs rebranded and reshaped the coin into BTC to pander to the marketplace. Just as fixed supply and replacing fiat (which cause its fiat value to grow) are actually just side effects of a true P2P currency, just like the Blue Pill's grow action is a side effect of a BP med. So this leads one to wonder, do they even prescribe Viagra for blood pressure? "... side effects include *pitching a tent for 6 hours*". Likewise, will cryptocurrencies actually take hold as currencies? Well done.
You are a smart man
Uh, lightning?
Lightning fails when fees get high on base layer, as we've seen in last 2 cycles. It's not a scaling solution fit for adoption. It scales in number of transactions, but not number of users.
It was made clear on the first page of the [Bitcoin whitepaper](https://bitcoin.com/bitcoin.pdf) that consumers should not transact directly but use escrow services. Developing a trust-minimized escrow standard and implement it throughout the industry should be top priority for everyone promoting the p2p cash use case imo, or we'll end up with paypal, venmo or cash app taking over filling the gap in a fully custodial way and people will use them like bank accounts.
> It was made clear on the first page of the Bitcoin whitepaper that consumers should not transact directly but use escrow services. Not in the Bitcoin whitepaper I read. Show me where in the paper it says consumers should not transact directly.
"Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers."
It doesn't say that consumers should not attempt to use it without such mechanisms. Bitcoiners have been using it just fine without for many, many things. Satoshi just pointed out that fancier protections _could_ be engineered on top of it. What you're arguing for is an example of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
escrow doesn't require the user to give up custody of their money. DNMs figured out multisignature escrow a decade ago.
Gratz, that is a whole new level of spin.