Possibly true. This means that good code can conclude shit result as a coin. But if you call some coin as shit, I think it is inmoral to use the code of it. The guys who developed the code surely didn't want to invent shitcoin. And if a coin is shit, those who call it shitcoin, should know enough about it to argue in a well-founded way what is the problem with the given coin. I think that just because it has less value on crypto exchanges does not make it a shitcoin. E.g. the arguments in favor of "bitcoin only" the Chainalyis in a study refuted it in 37 points.
Some coins beside bitcoin have advantages too and if you look at the crypto market, which is mainly driven by the price of bitcoin, the coins that follow the trend and don't lose value, I wouldn't call them shitcoins. And it's also not true that every other coin has private companies behind it, except bitcoin. Look at the mining pools, practically everything is in China's hands. Therefore, the fact that we do not officially know who Satoshi Nakamoto is does not mean that decentralization is true.
Sorry for the long answer, we deviated quite a bit from the original topic.
I don’t really have time to discuss this topic; I’m already over it 😂 but when you get it you get it, an trust me you will. I’ll see you in the other side 👋🏻🤙🏻
Thread collapsed