I don’t buy the “protocol allows it so 🤷‍♂️” line. Email, sms, and voice calls all attempt to deal with spam even though the protocol technically allows for it to occur.

Either way, I’m making a prediction. We’ll see how it goes. I have no insight into Saylor other than what he utters in public

I didn’t expect to see him pushing inscriptions and yet here we are

In five years Saylor and the loudest mouthpieces at Bitcoin Magazine will be leading the charge to increase block size. They’ll say it’s needed to accommodate all the great new things (spam) they’ve put on chain.

They’ll reduce the decentralization by making impractical for plebs to run a node.

They’ll claim it’s for the better for #bitcoin when what they really care about it ROI.

That is exactly true, I know that. But we don't have to accept everything that it is used for as being 'good' for Bitcoin, do we?

Why does this need to be done on Bitcoin? Why are we experiencing this dilution of Bitcoins original usecase?

Well obviously we have an authoritarian government in the US. They are climbing in your windows, they are snatching your freedoms up. Hide your pans, hide your USB cables because everything is a money transmitter up in here. #Bitcoin

#cryptocurrency community, could you please refer a good source of content material & white papers that I can read as a cryptocurrencies beginners, trading, lending and borrowing?

Bonfire, Glenn O. Coleman, 1928

Sad stuff…

If you don't know

Halvening and short term price -

Supposedly the effect is a reduction of supply, and the subsequent increase of price. The sellers are the miners, but who are the buyers?

So, first condition: demand is what drives price increase, not offer. Is it there?

Enter ETFs, Ordinals and Runes and associated VC scammers and "Bitcoin OG" grifters, retail (completely absent this cycle so far...)

I'm not saying there is or isn't demand. Just putting it out there.

Then, assuming demand is there, price doesn't automatically double to catch up. So, the amount of BTC miners have to sell to cover operation costs and satisfy shareholder profits actually increases. Which is detrimental to price increases. Which means that an even larger demand is required to move the price up.

Is my logic wrong? Again, rather than asserting anything, I'm just putting this out there, see if anybody has arguments that contradict my reasoning.

With the Fed insisting inflation is not under control and large asset managers pivoting even more to bonds, and the summer right here, I think it doesn't bode well for risk-on assets, let alone Bitcoin in terms of demand. Not in the short term.

Which I as said yesterday, I very much welcome because I have unshakable long term conviction and a cooldown of BTC's price right now would allow

me to keep buying and stacking like the psycho I am.

I have a confession to make…

I crashed 20 blocks before the deadline. 🤷‍♂️

1. Infinite mathematicians walk into a bar. The first one orders one beer. The second one orders half a beer. Before the third can place his order, the bartender slams two beers on the counter and asks the group to move on

2. Infinite mathematicians walk into a bar. The first one orders one beer. The second one orders half a beer. This time, the third one gets his order in before the bartender can react: he orders one-third of a beer. The bar stays open forever

Man, all these internet videos are so put on.

#WetPaint #Artstr #AbstractArt