Gold lost. Complete defeat. Thanks for explaining how it lost though.
Discussion
is that why China is setting up gold stores in 12 of the BRICS countries? as reserves?
Gold lost as a money, meaning it lost for societies as a whole.
That doesn’t mean states don’t have use for it. It lost nonetheless. Big time loser.
Betting on gold rather than Bitcoin today is like betting on silver rather than gold back then.
Talking about BRICS… India lost such a bet before. They’ll lose again if they don’t embrace Bitcoin.
I'd have to ask you, which Bitcoin and why
Available UTXOs because they’re energy-backed and therefor superior as money
Energy backed? What do you mean?
You know the bitcoin story. I won’t repeat it.
I read the whitepaper but idk about energy backed coins?
It’s implied by pow.
Beware of the „if it’s not in the whitepaper it doesn’t exist“ mindset. Many fall for this kind of thinking, becoming bcashers and alike as a result. Satoshi used words sparsely. Much was only implied if anything.
The map is not the territory.
But the white paper is explicit. What "Bitcoin" is now is not what the whitepaper outlined.
I still don't understand the energy pov regarding proof of work. I understand the energy outlay to generate the work, but I don't understand how that transferrable in the future or energy potential or whatever
Bitcoin as it stood was a trustless system, because the protocol never changed. But it has changed, and continues to have developers changing that.
So idk in like six months we'll have Bitcoin Knots becoming unhinged and we'll get Bitcoin nuCore or something similar
Okay, let's go through your points.
1) HAHAHAHAHAHA, wrong! I won't discuss shitcoin narratives, which have already been disputed countless times.
2) Energy is work not expended, which makes both highly interchangeable. That’s why both are expressed in joules, by the way.
3) Oh boy! For someone so concerned with the literal wording of the white paper, this might come as a shock, but Satoshi never mentions the term "trustless" because Bitcoin was never trustless. Trustless systems do not exist. They can't. Therefore, it wasn't Satoshi's goal. His goal was to minimize the need for trust and eliminate the need for a trusted third party. That's actually expressed in the white paper and it’s very different from what you said.
You won't discuss the other forks because why? You clearly avoid this mere fact that anyone can fork and duplicate Bitcoin, hell they could even fork it, remove the segwit and taproot changes and the 1mb cap and return it to the original protocol as stated in the whitepaper and Bitcoin forums.
There's at least 10 forks so far that I've heard of, all 'bitcoin'.
So what makes BTC Bitcoin when core wants to change the protocol? What version are you on? On this, unchangeable, immutable protocol?
No wonder Satoshi left 😂
Dude, gold has failed. Time to leave the fiat tradfi world and adopt bitcoin
the only reason why your precious monaro has survived is because paranoid cokeheads buying on bohemia think it's gr8
without the dark web, monero ded
bitcoin has had many battles, but i guess you didn't do your homework
Because those forks didnt gain consensus, so they’re not worth discussing.
It’s like saying we should discuss Calvinism vs Catholicism and which was the more successful religion - well it’s pretty fucking obvious to anyone with eyeballs which did better in the long run, isn’t it?
And what happens when Saylor and Fink team up, or rather the entire Cantor Fitzgerald crew and say to everyone 'we hold the majority and so we are the consensus"
Idk if many people can think long term, but I most certainly can and I see Bitcoin/SATs flowing up to these treasuries from private holders, and in like 10 years time you'll have the new central bankers but instead of gold or other reserves that have this digital sha token
They end up on the SaylorFinkCoin and we burn their coins on BTC, reducing the overall supply making us way richer.
Reducing supply doesn't necessarily mean price goes up. The threat of new market entrants, especially in cryptos, is extremely high.
I suppose it boils down to blind faith
Today I have theoretical share of X/21M
If tomorrow we burn Saylor, Fink et al, I have X/19.5M (or whatever the number is we burn from SaylorFinkCoin).
Yes, burning cunts off the network does basically guarantee we all get richer as our share of the network increases regardless of dollar valuation.
It’s not going to happen to some random individual holding 1.2 BTC, but if the spook Saylor wants to play games, or Zionist Larry, yeah you watch and see.
The main philosophical debate right now in Bitcoin is whether to burn Satoshi’s coins in a quantum upgrade, or not.
That has arguments on both sides.
Suitcoiners try to co-opt #Bitcoin? You watch them get burned within a fucking week.
We are not playing games.
Study the fuck up.