So first of all this mostly reads like an incoherent and rambling onslaught of non-sequiturs. Second of all the tldr here is basically: if you disagree with Bitcoin you're simply not smart enough to get it, which is an argument that is simultaneously offensive, naive and arrogant.
There are some very well defined arguments suggesting Bitcoin may not be viable that are advanced by people who actually have an understanding of economics and finance. You should try reading up on it.
In particular, seek out the intellectual maturity to understand that the fate of Bitcoin as a currency is not so much about the blockchain as it is about the underlying economics. There is no full faith and credit backing to Bitcoin's value. The network is vulnerable to majority control by well-financed parties with malicious intent. If Bitcoin ever were to threaten major reserve currencies, swift action would be taken to regulate it out of existence (and you're a fool if you think otherwise).
Bitcoin is little more than a Ponzi scheme orchestrated largely by salivating investors and sheeple like you are playing right into their hands.
There are at least 5 blaming statements in your comment. You'd do well to stop speaking for others and simply speak your mind. It's pretty hard to tell exactly how you feel about it, other than angry. I get that you are angry about it and my post. Fine.
Out of curiosity, do you trust the technology and do you trust the stored values in the blockchain? Talking the ledger here, not the value of Bitcoin on a given day. I'd like to say I know the answer to those questions, but frankly your vitriol is getting in the way.
Regardless of your response, I thank you heartily for proving my point Bitcoin is polarizing. It is.
> people who actually have an understanding of economics and finance.
I'm not sure such people exist.
Economics and finance is full of very smart people who are very good at convincing other people that their opinion is more valid than the next guy's. The more convincing the argument, the more suspicious you should be of it.
No, what I actually said was that the common person was currently unable to understand how the network implements something that can be trusted by them. There's a significant difference between 'going with the flow' (getting it) and fully understanding how something works, especially when you are considering the need to trust it for financial purposes.
Regarding your last claim, do you really think that everyone that doesn't like/hates Bitcoin really thinks it's shitty technology? Because, if you do, that would imply they understand how it works. I realize 'how it works' means different things to different people here, so to clarify, we're talking about how it arrives at consensus with the ledger.
8 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 25.5 ms ] threadThere are some very well defined arguments suggesting Bitcoin may not be viable that are advanced by people who actually have an understanding of economics and finance. You should try reading up on it.
In particular, seek out the intellectual maturity to understand that the fate of Bitcoin as a currency is not so much about the blockchain as it is about the underlying economics. There is no full faith and credit backing to Bitcoin's value. The network is vulnerable to majority control by well-financed parties with malicious intent. If Bitcoin ever were to threaten major reserve currencies, swift action would be taken to regulate it out of existence (and you're a fool if you think otherwise).
Bitcoin is little more than a Ponzi scheme orchestrated largely by salivating investors and sheeple like you are playing right into their hands.
* The wastefulness of miners!
* The blockchain bloat!
* The lack of anonymity!
* The deflation!
* The lengthy block confirmation times!
* The lack of security!
* The lack of chargebacks!
* The badly coded software!
* The fees!
* The centralization!
* The slow, slow, slow transaction speed.
It's in the shill handbook. Check under Appendix B.
Out of curiosity, do you trust the technology and do you trust the stored values in the blockchain? Talking the ledger here, not the value of Bitcoin on a given day. I'd like to say I know the answer to those questions, but frankly your vitriol is getting in the way.
Regardless of your response, I thank you heartily for proving my point Bitcoin is polarizing. It is.
I'm not sure such people exist.
Economics and finance is full of very smart people who are very good at convincing other people that their opinion is more valid than the next guy's. The more convincing the argument, the more suspicious you should be of it.
edit: bad editing
Maybe, just maybe, Bitcoin actually is a shitty technology and that's why people don't trust it?
Regarding your last claim, do you really think that everyone that doesn't like/hates Bitcoin really thinks it's shitty technology? Because, if you do, that would imply they understand how it works. I realize 'how it works' means different things to different people here, so to clarify, we're talking about how it arrives at consensus with the ledger.