Glad we can discuss our differences in thought though. We both ought to continue to self-reflect, for example if BTC is not above $100K EoY and you're 90% conviction turned out to be wrong, hopefully there will be some adjustment of your beliefs and re-evaluation of future probabilities. And if it is above $100K EoY, in my case I will begin weighting these counter-narratives higher and I will have to adopt a new dominant view of BTC if it breaks $250K soon.
I think you're very good with numbers and also with Traditional Finance metrics
When NoahA and I talk about smart Bitcoiners, it's people like Preston Pysh who are able to articulate the value proposition of Bitcoin using TradFi metrics
Other smart people use other metrics, like hash rates which are going nuclear but that does not make sense to Wall Street
You're more concerned with NGU (number go up) price technology of Bitcoin and for sure it's a valid TradFi metric, higher price brings in more adoption
I think your high time preference is a function of fiat philosophy, but it's a non-issue during this period of the 4-year cycle of Bitcoin, $100k and $250k, notwithstanding
When you have some free time, perhaps you can watch the video as it speaks your TradFi Quantitative Analysis language, you might be able to watch it in 1.5x or 1.75x speed
We see these quantitative breakdown from Bitcoiners but they are not countered or contradicted as false by non-believers of Bitcoin
