Finally got a 1-star book review by someone who hates bitcoin and tether (and didn’t read the book).
Pretty sure I know that guy on Twitter. One of those obsessed reply guys. 
Discussion
achievement unlocked
With five 5-star reviews from readers and one 1-star review from this non-reader, he brought the average all the way down to 4.1 until more readers leave reviews. :( 
Hey Lyn, I am interested in your book. Is it available to deliver in Europe?
Mine is on the way; will review after reading it! Stoked
i still believe BTC was created by the CIA to launder their drug money from their Colombian cocaine and Afghan heroin pipelines.
but they soon realized they can make even more money on BTC itself.
the funniest part to me is the in-fighting between Bitcoiners and Shitcoiners. it's like watching religious people argue over who is worshipping the "correct" G_d.
i guess BTC would be Judaism in this analogy.
just because Christianity and Islam are both fake wannabe versions of Judaism doesn't mean mean Judaism itself is real.
well, it's real in the sense that if you believe you're G_d's chosen people then it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
but is that a good enough reason to keep believing in something ?
😂😂😂😂😂
He's right but I suspect there's more content to the book than "buy Bitcoins"
Book never once says to buy bitcoin or calls it digital gold. (I know who it is; he didn’t read it.)
Yes but Bitcoins are digital air. There's no "there" there
I became disillusioned with fiat because it's an "IOU Nothing", a credit that can be used to track payments but which ultimately has no real value or substance.
Bitcoins are just a more perfect fiat - digital credits that (maybe) follow more fair rules but don't solve the problem of fiat value
This is the take I have subscribed it's just a better FIAT..
The Bitcoins crowd made it to NOSTR I see. Beauty of open protocols everybody is welcome
“Bitcoins are just a more perfect fiat” must be up there with the worst take of 2023. Bitcoin needs better critics
Imagine if Satoshi promised to pay 1 physical Bitcoin for each coin "mined" on his ledger. Then suppose he defaulted and it became clear that he would never pay.
Would Bitcoins retain their full value in such a situation? How is the present situation where a Bitcoin was never claimed to be worth anything different from the situation in which all such claims have been abandoned?
In your scenario bitcoin is an IOU to be redeemed. That is not the reality. Of course if that was the case and Satoshi defaulted then it would fail, but again that is not how the system works. Your assertion that the current situation is one where bitcoin is never claimed to be worth anything is false.
Bitcoin is a good. People can choose to spend resources to either make more of it (to an extent) or acquire it. As long it continues to satisfy people’s needs it will continue to be valued by them which will be reflected in the price.
What need do Bitcoins satisfy that Bitcoins-as-defaulted-IOUs would not also satisfy?
Bitcoin is not an IOU. If you wanted to compare bitcoin with actual bitcoin IOUs like holding bitcoin on an exchange then that’s a fair comparison. A defaulted bitcoin IOU does not satisfy any need, so I’m guessing you think bitcoin does not satisfy any need. That may very well be the case for you, but for the many people that hold bitcoin it satisfy the need to store value among other things like the need to send value across borders for those without access to the banking system.
The point is the manner in which Bitcoin satisfies their needs - ie by being a secure internet-based accounting system. But what does that accounting system count? Nothings.
If you have a secure accounting system for nothings, it will function just as well whether those nothings are claims on disks of pure Bitcoinium or invisible pink orange bitcoin unicorns.
I see the disconnect now.
The bitcoin ledger tracks the movement/ownership of UTXOs which are made up of satoshis and require energy to be produced. Perhaps you believe that goods must be physical, which would be mistaken of course. But even then you can actually have physical instantiations of Bitcoin using tools like Opendimes or Satscards.
Hope this clarifies things
Almost Marxist
Energy theory of value
Machine labor
I see how you might think that, but that is not the case. That Bitcoin units (satoshis) take energy to produce does not imply that their worth is because energy was spent. Every good takes energy to produce. The satoshis produced today take orders of magnitude more energy than the bitcoin produced in 2010, yet they are worth the same. If their value was due to the energy/labor spent then we would expect to see satoshis with different value which is not the case.
What is the value due to? You hope to pass it on to the next fellow. And what does he value it for? He hopes to pass it on to the next fellow.
Better hope you never run out of fellows
I can’t speak for everyone since valuations are subjective and vary from individual to individual.
Undoubtedly, many people don’t care for bitcoin as a form of money and instead hope they can find a fellow that will buy it for more than they did. That can be true for many goods, speculation is not unique to bitcoin. But generally speaking people that hold bitcoin for its use case as money value it because it lets them store value and to a lesser extent (at the moment) it lets them exchange it for other goods and services. The latter varies from place to place. But as we know it takes time for goods to monetize.
And by storing value, I mean purchasing power.
It would be strange to think of the USD as reflecting the "energy spent" on producing it, since this would make it simultaneously nearly valueless in one sense (money just mouse click away), and highly valued in another (the electricity, the labor, social capital, education, technical knowledge infrastructure, markets & networks that support the "full faith & credit of the US Treasury" don't come cheap).
The way some people describe it, hashrate and levels of energy expenditure are more a representation of the security, resilience, & technical capacity of BTC network infrastructure: (i.e. network health) than anything else.
The real cost of hashrate (computational & electrical power) needed to run a technically elegant & super efficient market for commodity money, seems like an emergent (or latent) derivative market of some kind - with BTC's difficulty adjustment auto-arbitraging the whole thing through code 🍄🤯
Or not 🤷
But the network is equally secure whether I own 1 satoshi or 100 bitcoins
So if the value of the currency is derived from the security, why is it value proportional to the number of units I own, which are no more or less secure due to their number?
This is the same root problem with fiat/token money. The $100 Federal Reserve Note is not actually 100x as fine a grade of green cotton as the $1 Note. The relative value of different units is arbitrary.
In contrast specie does not suffer from this problem - 1kg of gold is exactly 1,000x as much gold as 1g, and the material itself is what has value.
The value is not solely a reflection of the security of the network. Certainly people value the network and the asset in part because the ledger is secure. As I mentioned earlier, different people value bitcoin for different reasons.
That accounting system counts cryptographic GUARANTEES of energy expenditure (energy in physics contexts)
Energy expenditure (somewhat) constraints supply, does not provide demand
But I can create a new ledger with the same code, BTC2, which meets all the same needs as Bitcoin Classic
Nobody will care.
You’ll need network effects to dilute the “supply” you’re implying
Also, intrinsic value does not exist
There would need to be some difference in the code; otherwise, you would be running Bitcoin.
By all means you can do that. See BCash and BSV as failed examples. The assumption that your new BTC2 would meet the same needs that Bitcoin meets is that an assumption. Real world examples would suggest it wouldn’t.
I think secure accounting systems (with self-custodial units that can be transferred or brought with the user globally) compete with each other in terms of security, immutability, liquidity, etc.
In other words, now that this technology exists, it serves a need that I and others want. I don’t want to “redeem” bitcoins for anything- I want to take some of my dollars (units of a centralized ledger which don’t “count” anything other than themselves) and some of my gold (scare nature-based units but ones that I can’t really bring globally out of or into ports of entry), and convert them into units that are more portable.
Bitcoin provides a utility that so far nothing else can- I can memorize twelve words and use them to bring money globally. I don’t want to redeem my dollars, gold, or bitcoin for anything, other than goods and services. They are all basically units on a ledger, with different maintainers of the ledger (a central bank, or nature, or miners+nodes).
So if I determine that I want some % of my network to be self-custodial and globally portable, which imo seems to be a no-brainer, I then have to determine 1) what % of my net worth and 2) in which network or networks.
The only three network options at scale are Bitcoin and Ethereum, and then stablecoins which run on those and other networks. Of these, Bitcoin is the most decentralized, immutable, and biggest (which is relevant for salability/liquidity). Ethereum is big but more centralized, so I can’t really know what it’ll look like in say five years. Historically it had difficulty bombs which made hard forks easy to do, and now it uses proof of stake. And then stablecoins are useful but centralized; they are just digital Eurodollars.
So if I want globally portable and rather immutable units on a rather decentralized ledger, that is liquid and that I can self custody, Bitcoin pretty much uniquely offers that utility. And it has a monetary premium on top of its utility because it is scarce and has lots of optionality. So imo it serves as commodity money like anything else.
In the second case a promise got broken and the holders were betrayed. They didn‘t get what they paid for. The price should go down.
In the first case, they knew what they were buying. They got what they wanted. It had value for them. The value is in the (human) network.
He’s right but a growing number of institutional players including Larry Fink are wrong.. (I’m assuming you’re already discounting the opinions of bitcoiners). Your take is becoming increasingly fringe by those who think about it for a reasonable amount of time
Thankfully truth is not a popularity contest (although price may be, for a little while)
I agree with that maxim but it doesn’t mean they’re wrong either. Being a fully decentralised ledger/system with a programmed issuance schedule all backed by tremendous amounts of energy make this the very antithesis of fiat.
I will add though that it’s great to see some non-bitcoiners start coming into nostr. Welcome
Thank you
I share the doubts many express here about regime currency, regime science, regime health, regime food, regime wars, etc
You are my people even if you do believe in magic internet money that doesn't really exist
If Bitcoins are backed by energy who is the issuer of the coins and in what form will they deliver the energy and how much energy will the issuer deliver for each coin?
Gold is not "backed by energy" nor is gold "stored energy" or anything like that. Rather, the energy required to find, extract & refine gold is a limitation on supply. There is zero energy *demand* for gold. Nobody buys gold so they can go to the issuer of gold (God himself, or at least a supernova) and redeem each tz of gold for a certain volume of oil or a certain number of kilowatt-hours of electricity.
But, when the dollar was backed by gold this is precisely what happened. A perfectly valid way to get gold was to first acquire US dollars and then proceed to the issuer of dollars and exchange them for gold, at a fixed exchange rate and for a predetermined form of gold.
If the world went back on a gold standard then the need for bitcoin would be reduced enough that it would probably die off - however, this isn’t going to happen imo.
Get yourself a small allocation - this is an asymmetric play that you shouldn’t miss out on
I haven’t read the book yet, but i am excited to do so. You need them Lyn! 💪🫡 
What a richard
Peter Schiff?? 😂
Boooooooo... Just started reading and it's so well written. Mind changing concepts presented in a very comfortable language 👏
Hate always comes from below
That’s has to be a bitcoiner making gold bugs and tether truthers look stupid with satire posts 😂
Legend. Probably worth considering how great that reply made him feel, as he opened a can of ravioli, to eat in his mother’s basement.
They obviously don’t listen to anything you have to say (ie that bitcoin is only a fraction of what you talk about). I’ll give 100 percent chance that they didn’t read the book.
Haha. I love the narrative that tether, with its 80B market cap somehow it the reason why bitcoin is at 26k or even 69k. But somehow not when it dropped to 3k?
Every usdt created is a dollar, so there is that, but also somehow 80B created 500B plus 250B Eth, plus billions in other shitcoin market cap. Hilarious.
Wait till he finds out that literally all prices of everything are propped up by printing ☠️
Analogue people with irreversible Stockholm syndrome to the system robbing them! No surprise here!
Haters gonna hate 🤙
He’s correct. Bitcoin is digital air… when you’re drowning under an ocean of fiat…
He is literally a Dick.
WTF does bitcoin have to do with tether? 🤣
Is Richard the male Karen? I'm not 100% convinced, but he makes a strong argument!
But gold IS beautiful Lyn
Haters gonna hate. 😂 
I want to see digital currency succeed, and recently converted a modest amount of ETH to BTC, but can't decide whether it's nothing but an interesting concept I can afford to mess with at low stakes.
Gold cope
Congratulations 😂 Richard sounds like Peter Schiff.
😂
We all need at least one hater!
Richard the Hater 🤡
I just submitted my 5 star based on what I expect I will read! I’ve read enough of your content I’m sure it will match or exceed 5 stars!
Haha a gold bug. Go figure. One day he will figure out we are on the same team.
Salty tears, Peter Schiff vibes.
That guy can GFY.
#Bitcoin is beautiful.
Seems like a nice guy
Definitely Sounds like a “Richard”
IDK about yall... but I find a review of a book from a reviewer who clearly didn't read it very "unhelpful." Richard has a salty vendetta....
I will agree with one thing in his reply, #Bitcoin hasnt been here for 5000 years and isn't shiny or tangy. He is absolutely right about this fact, but must be stupid in investing because anything worth value has never been shiny, tangy or popular just like #Bitcoin is.
nostr:npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a , water off a Duck’s back, seriously ignore that shit. Wait for a real review from someone who can critique it and offer you good feedback.
I always learn a lot from reading solid reviews.
The only way to respond to childish arguments that that is in-kind. May I recommend the following retort?
“If you love gold so much why don’t you just marry it….!”
With your reach, this was inevitable. At least they took the time to express their view, even if most of us disagree.
On the bright side - you got the first bad one out of the way!
Evidently, the "digital" part is beyond his comprehension. 🙄
I wounder how he can use the internet
This was Kevin Brambrough, wasn’t it?
Took me a solid two days uninterrupted to read it (me so slooow). It is excellent! Once I hit the chapters on Privacy and Encryption I was like.,. dude, she did it, she made the greatest and best book in the world (this is just a tribute). #Tenaciou sD reference for you there.
Glad you liked it!
Consider posting a review on Amazon if you haven’t yet. Each one counts, especially in the early phases.
Apparently Amazon review gate keepers are amazingly slow to publish people's reviews. It's been 3 and a half days since I submitted...
LMAO reading a book in 2 days is not slow. IDK how many pages Lyn wrote, but it will probably take me 3 weeks to finish the book.
It was deliberate on my part. I rarely get that much uninterrupted time and took full advantage of it. Truth is, I will be going back to review my highlights/notes and certain chapters for weeks. it's just how my brain works (or doesn't).
😂♾️
Im sure there is about to be a landslide of 5 stars coming in soon. It takes a few days to get your amazon order so most people just got it and may not have knocked out all 500+ pages yet. But when they do it'll be a surge.
They hate us...cuz they aint us.
The guy's name is Dick.
Oh that was peter schiff
why bother acknowledging such a lost twit?
it wasn't me Lyn
LOL
Oh no ! Peter was bored this Sunday.
Observation tells me that some gold bugs behave like people who are possessed. Don't count that one.
Quite a contrast to my perspective:
My copy will only arrive tomorrow, but I already know it will be AWESOME! 🫡
Don’t focus on the only negative review Lyn. Share what people who are happy have to say as well 🤗
I've engaged him a few times to point out real use examples. Particularly in developing countries. He tends to stop replying. There's another bitcoin giga skeptic who's actually intellectually honest. Need to find him and get his review.
That is definitely chuckle worthy
Having haters is a sign of succes, npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a. Keep up the great work!
BTW, when is your book for sale for #sats on #Nostr?
While I'm also a Dick that's not me. That Dick is just spewing nonsense. To bad you can't down vote reviews.
Our brain is wired to focus on the negative, try to ignore them :)
Only gold bugs are scared of bitcoin not the other way around 🙃
Johns are all the same.
I'll never understand they hate on people you don't know, just, why?! I always assume these are bitter persons struggling with themselves and the world.
Richard sounds like a total Dick
This is bitcoin at the "Then they fight you" stage, Lyn's book is just the vehicle
Just bought a copy! Waiting for it to arrive...
There will always be a market for screaming a contrarian point of view to the polarized populace. The segregated audience for statist and fiat believers vs Bitcoin. No one will remember if they are wrong as a reviewer. People will only remember if the author is right or wrong, putting it on the line for the world to consider. I have listened to dozens of your interviews and 1000s of hours of Bitcoin education. I applaud you.
Thank you for all your work, Lyn. I haven't read your new book yet, but I'm sure it's passionate, fresh and eye-opening - just like all your other work.
PSA: Leaving a bad review for a product you've never used is a dick move.
The same bitcoiners who rightfully defend Lyn here will also shit on #Softwar without having turned a single page. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The moral of the story is don't judge books before you've read them.
nostr:note13zljmz8zjktguc8cy6ynn8ttq96df0lc638ljmvh58lvhr2vvldsq878ut
Funny how these "honest" users (haters) always use the phrase "Very disappointed"
Hodl Magoo ✅
Richard is a Dick
Looks like Peter Schiff
Sorry Lyn, haven't bought yet... I'm dropping hints to my wife with my bday coming up! My review will be honest, but I expect it will be good one.
Haters gonna hate. 🤷
Stop talking about Peter Schiff like that!
Perhaps he needs to read more
Looks like Peter Schiff