Nostr Web Client

I had an epiphany today. Maybe it’s accurate, maybe it’s not.

“The likelihood of someone understanding and adopting Bitcoin as a store of value or medium of exchange is directly proportional to their overall comfort with seeking out information that challenges deeply held assumptions.”

I used to think it was just a fundamental lack of curiosity or intellectual laziness that kept many from going down the Bitcoin rabbit hole. Now I’m starting to think that for many otherwise intelligent people, it is actually the fear of the truth, that Humanity has been enslaved by the fiat monetary system, that keeps individuals away. Or perhaps the fear of embarrassment, that even with their degree in finance, they didn’t see it.

This thesis would also account for the many who, rather than simply ignoring Bitcoin, actually lash out against it. When someone feels intellectually “backed into a corner”, it comes down to pure fight-or-flight.

All of this to say, that maybe we need to focus more on explaining the effects of monetary debasement, rather than starting conversations with the ₿ word in the first few sentences. It might keep our audience from shutting down out of discomfort or out of recollection of the incessant FUD they’ve been exposed to.

What do you think?

#asknostr #bitcoin #grownostr

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

RedTailHawk 4mo ago

It requires humility to say "Maybe everyone I ever trusted about money was wrong and they were just faking competence on that subject."

Bitcoin is an ego test.

Jay 4mo ago

I'm so sleepy I only read the quoted section.

But yes 100% agree

1776 4mo ago

I can see you’ve been busy with the release 🤙🏽 GN

Jay 4mo ago

GN 👋

BTC-BACKPACKER 4mo ago

Fear of challenging assumptions or admitting gaps in knowledge likely keeps many from embracing Bitcoin. Starting with monetary debasement could ease people into the conversation, avoiding defensive reactions triggered by Bitcoin’s stigma. It’s a thoughtful approach to breaking through resistance.

GJM 4mo ago

I think fear has little to nothing to do with processing what bitcoin is. It’s pretty accurate to say that everyone who is into bitcoin also represents on a fairly wide spectrum of understanding about what it is and why they hold (or trade). The result is a message that is both not unified and often times a misrepresentation delivered by people with varying levels of trust. IMO intelligence also has little to nothing to do with groking Bitcoin. My theory revolves around the discomfort associated with having to reorganise your row of ducks. Nearly everyone goes through their days based on their version of “how the world works.” Diets, relationships, religious beliefs, world views all dictate how easy or hard it is to tweak or throw out a current view. People assemble their “thoughts” about how the world works in such a way as to support their chosen system. When a part of their system is challenged then the response is often a result of a subconscious attempt to defend something much bigger than just one aspect. That is because it can feel like the whole system is being attacked. The internal shift required to embrace Bitcoin is much bigger than an acknowledgement of an alternative money. Bitcoin requires people to do things that challenge the systems they have put in place to keep their world balanced. For many it is a conversion experience which leads to a shit show of self reflection that is not pretty to watch. Bitcoin is varying levels of hard for a lot of people who are just trying to keep their shit together and balanced. My 2 sats 🤪

WildBill 4mo ago

Share with me your thoughts on Kaspa and I’ll tell you what I think of your thesis. I see Bitcoin maximalists on here become religious zealots with thin arguments for their convictions. We encourage Boomers to understand the value proposition when they have wealth, but won’t objectively apply our proverbial selves.

1776 4mo ago

I think Kaspa has good fundamentals with a proof of work model, no pre-mine, fixed supply and decentralized model for transaction validation and mining. The node storage capacity requirements are a little hefty but not unmanageable. The centralization risk of the protocol is somewhat of a concern. But for those with unlimited choice and limited disposable income for asset investments, BTC is the better choice IMO. I think KAS has a high likelihood of trending to zero vs BTC because it is a relative late comer. I don’t think it will ever achieve escape velocity as an enduring $1T+ market cap asset soon enough (or ever) to be relevant as a long term store of value. BTC has too much of a head start. If such a small portion of society has adopted Bitcoin, even with its high profile and its adoption by huge asset managers and nation states, KAS is a pretty hard sell to anyone but frequency traders. And to me it’s just not that sexy. There can be only one.

WildBill 4mo ago

Why do you think storage capacity requirements are heart hefty? I assume you are proposing everybody run the entire archival node?

Why do you think centralization of the protocol is likely or a concern?

Why do you think there can only be 1?

1776 4mo ago

To quote Satoshi:

“If you don’t believe me or don’t get it, I don’t have time to try to convince you, sorry.”

WildBill 4mo ago

Haha I figured as much. I didn’t expect you to defend your position objectively. You can’t thoroughly engage on your opinions so you just dodge the questions. I had a prominent BTC maxi on here the other day telling me Kaspa was terrible because it used probabilistic finality model…

CarteBlanche 4mo ago

The best argument for bitcoin is explaining how fiat money actually works.

Then, explain bitcoin is governed by math and that nobody controls it.