Now try to explain Monero to maxis 😂
Concepts like mining at home and privacy in payments are just abstract concepts to them.
They never really understood what cryptocurrency is really about.
Discussion
I am one of those old school (2011) Bitcoin maxis who dabbled in and eschewed alts by about 2015. But the only one I saw was something that had significant use outside Bitcoin was and still is Monero. I have committed commits in the repo and was the "donation system" back in 2014-15.
In the early days, the Monero users actually sort of embraced the fact they were s***coiners like all the rest. Even though we did, for sure, see something about Moneeo that was special. But we never thought that it took the spotlight away from bitcoin. That was the big innovation. Manero is taking some risky trade off chances that may actually have been worth it.
It was sometime after the block size debate and bcash days that the Monero Community started to turn into the bcash community. Started having sour grapes about how Bitcoin had missed the point and it was all about "number go up". Basically all the bcash arguments.
And honestly, I think Monero had a better ground on which to make those arguments then Bitcoin Cash ever even did.
Monero is still useful. And until Bitcoin can do privacy the way Monero does it will always be. But I wouldn't put it past Bitcoin to inherit much of monero's skills. Most likely on other layers.
Anyway, all of that is to say mostly that trying to shame bitcoiners from the Monero perch is a waste of time in my opinion.
It goes beyond shaming, they need to learn why the heck we need crypto in the first place.
They won't escape with their "digital gold" after being KYC. They won't escape the unfair gov taxing on assets, they won't even be able to use that "gold" on serious topics that can change society.
The only shitcoins that I know are those speculative circus coins going around the exchanges whose only value is vanity. That is where your "digital gold" is right now.
New technologies, fairer mining techniques, better privacy. Those are innovations in crypto that we should and must promote. That's why we do these things.
I've mined BTC back in 2009, I've mined Monero years later and still today try out new tech that looks promising. That stupid maxi talk about shitcoins ain't different from dumb religious people in the medieval times.
So yes, such people ought to be shamed in public since they cause harm to all others that are naive and will either be arrested or lose everything due to some outdated virtual coins sponsored by governments.
you were mining in 2009?
CPU mining, there wasn't another way on those days. You'd do it solo and completely worthless (no exchanges, only dodgy use cases) but a good project at that time.
That is what happens when you are actually looking and testing new tech by yourself.
So you were one of the dozen people mining bitcoin in 2009?
There were definitively more than that.
From my tiny country were about 15 people trying these things in the army. US and east Europe would be over a few hundred each, if not more.
This was well advertised on the public mailing lists, BBS and later on web forums.
It's crucial to distinguish Bitcoin from other crypto assets.
Bitcoin stands out as the free market's choice for the best form of money—a reliable tool for saving. All other (crypto) assets are fundamentally considered shitcoins for this use case. 🏴☠️
Monero and other techs may have their niches, but when it comes to money, they still fall into the shitcoin category. There are many people working on Bitcoin privacy tools, ensuring it has viable level of privacy without needing a separate asset. 🛠️🔒
Constructive debate and education are key. Let’s recognize Bitcoin’s role while being open to other innovations in their specific areas.
Grandpa, there isn't usable privacy on that old tech.
The point of crypto isn't "saving", it is to keep your assets safe and be able of passing them to others without interference of third parties.
You know this, yet ignore reality.
Grandpa or not, proper saving means keeping assets safe while having an ability to transfer them without third parties—Bitcoin shines here. 🏴☠️
While other cryptos often seem to transfer value from investors to creators/promoters or are used to pump-and-dump on uneducated masses, Bitcoin stands as the only financially sound choice. Remember, Rome wasn’t built in a day, and Bitcoin privacy is a work in progress. It's already possible to use Bitcoin in a privacy-preserving way. 🔒
No, grandpa.
You've been told this several times: there no realistic way to safely transfer that dinosaur coin.
People get arrested and lose their money because of that boomer mentality.
The Canadian trucker incident does highlight potential issues with government intervention. Governments can and do try to freeze assets linked to personal identities via centralized exchanges.
However, Bitcoin’s design is fundamentally about decentralization and censorship resistance. When used correctly with privacy tools like CoinJoin and non-custodial wallets, it remains a strong option. 🔒
No system is perfect, but dismissing Bitcoin as a "dinosaur coin" overlooks its continual evolution and the strides being made in privacy and security. 🌟🏴☠️
End result? 99% identified and charged as guilty.
Welcome to the real world grandma.
Monero solves that.
The problem is not the tech it is the use of 3rd party custodians. Monero does not solve shit if you hold it on centralized exchanges and custodial wallets. Nice straw-man though 👍
There is no "viable level of privacy" in Bitcoin at all.
how can we even call it crypto?
or money?
it isnt used as money and usage as money is barely discussed anymore.
its being developed as a digital investment commodity.
so which is the shitcoin?
Bitcoin is the ultimate form of money because it reliably stores value over time. By definition, money must maintain its value, and Bitcoin excels at this. While being a Medium of Exchange is important, it's not the ultimate goal. However, Bitcoin is indeed used as a MoE, and the number of people transacting with it is continually growing. 🌍💰 Even though its primary strength is storing value over time in a decentralized censorship resistant manner, it also undeniably facilitates daily transactions around the world.
Adequate privacy can be achieved using Bitcoin through tools like CoinJoin, the Lightning Network, and non-custodial wallets. These tools enhance anonymity and security, making Bitcoin a viable option for both saving and spending. 🔒
Calling Bitcoin a "shitcoin" dismisses its unique position in the crypto ecosphere. Unlike any other cryptocurrency, Bitcoin has proven its resilience, decentralization, and ability to attract a strong, principled community.
A community of VCs, fiat degens and Saylor types is neither "strong" nor "principled."
The principled cypherpunks have largely left Bitcoin in the last 5+ years since the emphasis has moved to fiat-denominated NGU.
There are no viable Coinjoin options, the LN network does NOT offer robust privacy guarentees. There is no "viable level of privacy" AT ALL.
It is not money. It is a digital commodity you could also sometimes trade for goods and services. Although the community generally agrees this is a stupid use for your utxos and you're an idiot if you do.
And of course, your usage is obvious to chain surveillance.
wow, much crypto.
I can’t disagree right now, I’m hoping as this awful fiat NGU hysteria settles down there will be a renewed focus on truth
This is just an annoying side effect of the Bitcoin finding its true value in the free market. The main thing is it is cyclical and does not change any fundamentals.
Bitcoin is for everyone, both your friends and enemies. This does not change its value proposition, only strengthens it. There is undeniably a large base of Bitcoiners that are here to stay due to strong fundamentals regardless of any short lived hype cycles. Fiat NGU is just a side effect of the best form of money finding its fair valuation on the free market, true Bitcoiners recognize this.
Do you have a particular argument why CoinJoin (particularly Joinstr) does not provide a viable level of privacy or you are just blindly shitting on it because otherwise there is no practical reason for your shitcoin investment to exist?
If you (as most people) confuse definitions of the words Money and Currency that is on you. It doesn't change the fact that Bitcoin is the ultimate form of money easily replacing the next best thing (gold).
Are you for real? Joinstr isn't even live on Mainnet dude. Use Bitcoin much?
Ever?
Why would you try to make a case that a tool that isn't even live yet provides good privacy?
Also Wasabi is hot trash, Whirlpool is offline and JM coinjoins have been unwound.
So no good CJs, as I said.
Also The degens aren't coming to Bitcoin because it's the best money.
They're coming in precisely because it's an investment they can use for more Fiat.
Tbis whole pump is about Cantillionaires expecting Trump 2.0 to be good to crypto.
But sure keep kidding yourself that BlackRock thinks that Bitcoin is going to disintermediate the banks.
And if you want to get pedantic about definitions of money and currency let's just point out Bitcoin can't be Money at all, because it's not fungible.
Your maxi cope is a carefully constructed fantasy.
Wasabi is working, Joinstr is a development to fix centralized coordinator issue. More privacy tech is for sure to come, Lighting Network (Cashu) is another layer of privacy on top if needed.
Many people come to Bitcoin and stay for different reasons. NGU is just a by product of Bitcoin finding its true value as the best Store of Value in the existence. Whatever BlackRock thinks they can't fundamentally change Bitcoin and that's the whole point.
Fungibility isn't a binary, as long as it is at a certain level it is good enough. What would be your choice? Monero? Good luck using it as money or SoV (unlimited supply, centralized development), or as a currency (virtually no one else accepts it). At the very best you could buy and sell it when needed same as your counter party, but you both still need an entrance and an exit (most likely through centralized exchanges) which poses additional privacy risks.
"Wasabi is working"
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/wabisabi-deanonymization-vulnerability-disclosed
this is just more "Bitcoin will get privacy on Lx" hopium that Ive been hearing for the last 8 years.
And yes
Monero aligns with the original cypherpunk ethos of Bitcoin much more than the current cucked community does.
Unlimited supply is a stupid retort since at any given time the supply is known and predictable. You shouldn't have a problem with supply inflation since you already acknowledge gold as good money.
So obviously a static supply is NOT a hard requirement for good money.
I'll allow it will never see wide adoption.
But it will never be cucked by institutions either.
Feature not a bug.
These things take time, as I mentioned there is work done on more decentralized versions of CoinJoins. And using honest coordinators still provides some adequate privacy even today.
The thing about supply predictability is that it also depends on the ability of anyone (including core devs) making big changes to the protocol. Bitcoin in that regards is still the safest cryptocurrency out there.
Also when it comes to money and SoV, the winner takes all. That's why even though gold is the second best form of money/asset after Bitcoin, it is still inferior to it (in part because of the ever increasing supply).
the point is that gold remains hard money *despite* supply inflation.
its ridiculous for any serious person to insist a supply cap is a requirement for "hard money"
a hard cap is a tradeoff.
like tail emission is a tradeoff.
neither one are "superior" they have different incentive structures.
hard cap incentivizes SoV
tail emission incentivizes MoE.
there IS an unavoidable game theory problem with only part of the network paying for security costs on Bitcoin.
and as far as "winner takes all", the world is a lot more complicated than that.
insisting you know how things will turn out is just out and out hubris.
Gold is hard money, only relatively to fiat and other IOUs and easily inflatable commodities with large supply. In relation to Bitcoin it is not as hard which is reflected in BTC/Gold exchange rates.
Tail emission (uncapped supply inflation) does not incentivize MoE. This is a fiat Keynisian notion that does not reflect the reality.
I recommend everyone reading Bitcoin Standard Chapter 10 by nostr:npub1gdu7w6l6w65qhrdeaf6eyywepwe7v7ezqtugsrxy7hl7ypjsvxksd76nak on Money and particularly the part about "Why One Money?".
yeah bro
youre whole viewpoint is just
"i read the Bitcoin Standard this one time"
Saife is just this guy, you know?
not a prophet.
It's not about Saife, it is about the logically sound point he is making. You can see through out history that the hardest asset always outperformed closest competitors, hence winner takes all.
uh
bro
we use US dollars right now.
that statement is just obviously false.
maybe rethink the complexity of modern economics?
People being forced to use USD, does not make it a proper money or a hard asset. Not a single asset can compete in hardness and suitability of being money to Bitcoin. Here is what the market thinks (USD, Monero, Gold) , and we are only at the infancy of Bitcoin... 
Also
Making Spenders the only ones who pay for network security fees obviously incentivizes hodling
The entire Community goes on and on about the superiority of NOT using Bitcoin
and you're going to tell me that MoE is not being discouraged by a hard cap?
get real
MoE is definitely not discouraged, if anyone actually needs to make a transaction they are welcome to do so while paying a free market determined fee for it. If anything it encourages lower time preference and more sound financial habits.
Details or GTFO
who are these honest coordinators who are providing adequate privacy and how do you confirm them?
I'll wait.
kruw.io is the main one, has a lot of volume due to its reputation. I'm not saying that centralized coordinators is a perfect scenario, but even still good luck tracing coins that underwent thorough mixing.
Was just about to post this new Wasabai vulnerability you beat me to it
The state of Bitcoins privacy...
homeboy is obviously not someone who requires strong privacy 🙄
Very well written.
It just makes sense to adopt monero. Privacy, simplicity and realistic mining that anyone with a normal computer can achieve.
and as far as Blackrock goes I suggest reviewing this video by Andreas
For sure. Custodial Bitcoin is not real Bitcoin 🎯 BlackRock and anyone else for that matter are welcome to try to fundamentally change Bitcoin. In my opinion it is already too late for them to succeed.
which isn't the point he makes at all dude.
except maybe in passing.
watch the video.
"Custodial Bitcoin is not real Bitcoin"
Yet you suggest Cashu as a real alternative for using Bitcoin privately...
Just wait until they learn that lightning network is also not bitcoin, and just another coin together with some other technology that is pegged to something else.
Those guys are religious blockheads. I'm wondering how many of those work for federal agencies to spread such mass ignorance to the population.
I suggest to use it for specific use cases when needed, not to store a large portion of your wealth in it and replace your main net Bitcoin holdings.
This statement holds so much cognitive dissonance. You also use "shitcoins" and can't see it.
While Lightning and Cashu are objectively inferior to main net Bitcoin, at the very least they are natively convertible to BTC and track it’s performance. Hence they are still better than any other completely separate shitcoin
Cashu is a shitcoin by another name. It's literally an IOU that can rug you at any moment, infinitely and arbitrarily printable by the mint, and permissioned to redeem back your Bitcoin. It's a useful shitcoin. But you're still using a shitcoin.
If you can understand that then you can understand why other users find other shitcoins useful for other things.
Unless they claim those shitcoins being the superior form of money, I don't really care.
Might be better to call those things as "virtual coins" or casino coins.
BTC is a perfect store of value and that's what makes it irreplaceable, but there are other uses it doesn't fulfill, like being a cash currency. Whenever I say that, maxis here go through the roof.
Other cryptos can do what BTC cannot, it's that simple and I don't understand why people lose their marbles about it, like they attach their whole identity and being to BTC doing everything imaginable -- which again, it simply doesn't.
Then, those in the "alt coin" world as well have a wide range of reasons.
Some delude themselves about what "their" token can and will do, especially those saying that "their" token will replace BTC. Obvious nonsense.
Others are in it for the trading to maximize fiat earnings simply because there is a market, so why would you speculate in bonds or stonks, which are as fickle and manipulated as anything else (so is BTC trading), when you can get huge yields with dogeloncumrocketcoin? Among these, one section actually recognizes BTC as their preferred store of value and all they're doing is get more fiat to stack more sats.
There is nothing wrong with that, unless we also criticize those who work for fiat to stack sats, or anybody else who doesn't earn exclusively in BTC, or was able to mine thousands of them back when, and live on BTC forever more.
Me personally, I earn enough fiat working and can direct a sufficient amount to stacking sats so I don't feel the urge to speculate trading anything - no alts, no stonks, no forex, no nothing.
But I will not criticize those who do, just like I will not criticize those who decide to use something other than BTC as cash currency. Even if I don't, if it works for them why would anybody be salty about it?
Mostly agree, however there is practically no need for separate shitcoins when we have lighting network that is at the very least native to BTC and tracks its performance. But I agree there is ways to go to make using Bitcoin viable in all kinds of circumstances, including offline.
I personally don't critisize people working for fiat, unless they save their wealth in it (which just by itself fuels govs and central bankers). However when it comes to shitcoin trading (and even some separate stocks and indexes) I see it as a net negative overall. Basically people funnel value away from hard money to useless assets in the hope to dump on someone else and make them hold the bag. No value produced, just transferred from the more clueless people than themselves. And by speculating and putting money in those useless assets they help create an illusion that those assets have some value and in turn help to mislead people who don't know any better. But that just me and I get that some people morals are different from mine.
Otherwise, I couldn't care less about what IOUs and colored coins people are using to transact, as long at they understand what exactly they are doing and that BTC is only sound crypto viable for savings.
Right. But your reasoning is basically that "we know better" than people where people should put their money. We don't. We have a strong opinion about it, even a conviction. But what we don't have is the right to demand that people do as we do.
If we're right, it doesn't matter how broke wrong people become and how many hands the money pass. The market is always right and it always self-corrects. So the money will eventually flow to BTC.
We may prefer a faster pace, but that's something we just need to live with.
No disagreement there, the market will play itself out eventually 🤝
Ask the Samurai guys how doing privacy on layers works. I'm pretty certain they'll tell you it doesn't work well.