Comp Sci prof who doesn't think much of crypto

That's what I like about you, deaddog, when caught red-handed try to deflect and ignore the very lie that you keep repeating over and over and over and over
And that lie would be??
That bitcoin meets the definition of a ponzi?
That there is no practicle way to value bitcoin?
That there is no downside to cash when the price of an asset is falling?
That bitcoin requires a greater fool to keep increasing in value?
That bitcoin is having trouble being accepted as a currency?
That bitcoin is a secure store of value?
Or that by a certain date bitcoin will be worth a million dollars?
 
But you have to find someone to buy it from you. New money comes in to pay the existing investors. That has to come from someone else. Bitcoin doesn't have any income.
That fits the deifinition of a ponzi.

No.
The definition includes:
Pre-defined profit/timeline
There was no "work" of value creation done
 
Commodities have an inherent value in that there is an end use.

BTC offers the fastest, most distributed, permissionless, pseudo-anon network and still retains first mover advantage. This network has a decades worth of independently verifiable history of settlement finality of any MoE. In addition, it also acts as a speculative SoV, and entire emerging DeFi ecosystems and distributed markets use it as a base UoA.


It's cool not to understand it, nor the principles it promotes nor opportunity it presents.

To understand crypto's, you have to understand demand for scarce blockspace in an upcoming block. Setups are unfolding, Fortunes are being made.

Get your yeehaw's in now, for this too will pass.

You're most likely from an era that had corded phones, truth was fact-based and sound money was still something you could get your hands on.

The world has gone mobile. We are "ruled by primitive emotions. Still governed by medieval institutions and have god like tech in our hands."

Truth has become relative, willful ignorance, has knocked earned knowledge and wisdom off the pedestal.
 
Last edited:
And that lie would be??
That bitcoin meets the definition of a ponzi?
That there is no practicle way to value bitcoin?
That there is no downside to cash when the price of an asset is falling?
That bitcoin requires a greater fool to keep increasing in value?
That bitcoin is having trouble being accepted as a currency?
That bitcoin is a secure store of value?
Or that by a certain date bitcoin will be worth a million dollars?

See you're deflecting again, deaddog

Just to be clear, you understand how Bitcoin is traded, but you keep lying about how it is traded, so that makes you a lying piece of shit, deaddog??

And now you want to deflect to other discussion issues to bury the fact that you are a lying piece of shit, deaddog??

Bitcoin is a store of value and will be worth over a million $ in the future and you'll still be a lying piece of shit, deaddog


upload_2022-7-11_12-6-26.png


upload_2022-7-11_12-7-31.png
 
Nobody is refruting the claim that bitcoin is a get rich ponzi scheme.

There are tons of people "refruting" that claim. lol. At this point I could write a book about it but it would fall on def ears in this forum so I won't bother. The technical implications of bitcoin are covered extensively and you can read about it anywhere. But the punchline is that the supply is falling (yes, really) and always will. I've seen other assets do this, such as pink diamonds, and the price is explosive. Most people are accustomed to assets like stocks, metals, real estate, lumber, etc. With all of these supply can increase as demand increases. Bitcoin won't behave like those other assets.

You will also notice that the biggest critics of crypto know the least about it technically. They can't tell you how blockchain works. This is precisely the pattern I remembered with the Internet in the 1990s. Old men who thought they knew everything couldn't talk to you about it, yet they were certain no one would ever use the Internet for anything other than a toy.
 
There are tons of people "refruting" that claim. lol. At this point I could write a book about it but it would fall on def ears in this forum so I won't bother. The technical implications of bitcoin are covered extensively and you can read about it anywhere. But the punchline is that the supply is falling (yes, really) and always will. I've seen other assets do this, such as pink diamonds, and the price is explosive. Most people are accustomed to assets like stocks, metals, real estate, lumber, etc. With all of these supply can increase as demand increases. Bitcoin won't behave like those other assets.

You will also notice that the biggest critics of crypto know the least about it technically. They can't tell you how blockchain works. This is precisely the pattern I remembered with the Internet in the 1990s. Old men who thought they knew everything couldn't talk to you about it, yet they were certain no one would ever use the Internet for anything other than a toy.
Groovy. Keep buying with both hands while supplies last!
 
The technical implications of bitcoin

has nothing to do with it being a ponzi/kwonzi. Charles Ponzi's original business plan was sound, a simple Italian stamp arbitrage. It was the fact that he never actually executed the plan what made it a ponzi. Just the same, bitcoin can be the best money sending device AND still a ponzi.

Not that you ever gonna understand or acknowledge it. :)
 
Back
Top