Avatar
clr
2769f6bafad63e512b84cafebf0957ba6e3347b2b1e5d5f4a7c283328dac44e4

I am realising I haven't answered you question.

If your audience is located in Europe and America, then European afternoon seems quite obvious. But, as others said, just post when you please. Personally I tend to read the whole timeline, no need to repost.

Hi there. Since v. 2.1.2, Sparrow (in Ubuntu Linux, .deb package) does not find bitbox hww. I click on Scan and nothing happens. Before that version it was working flawlessly. Any ideas on what might be happening?

Where are now all the clowns that were begging for regulation and said that MiCA was going to be awesome and it was going to help adoption? I hope they realize their mistake and see that there is no such thing as "good" regulation.

Of course

nostr:note1sduyr5f9a6h34yp69xn9r9wnhtj8pxewt4llvc8zzqf50phzsy3sxxukya

So what happens when there is a correction in the price? How is he going to pay? Because MS shares will drop and lenders will demand their principal back rather than MS shares.

If you want to play fiat games you have to abide by the fiat rules. One of them is that markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent (here, "irrational" means bitcoin correcting). Or do saylorites believe that the fiat bosses will just watch and do nothing while their system gets destroyed by a single dude? That looks too naïve to me.

And MS's bitcoin is not spread. Only the MS's shares are spread. You are assuming that the rule of law will hold. If it does, we don't need bitcoin in the first place. If it doesn't, MS will be intervened/nationalized when it crashes.

In the realm of Bitcoin, who "owns" it? Whoever can sign a valid transaction with a particular UTXO that gets added to the ledger or whoever the government says?

Someone please explain to me how this Saylor's Perpetual Motion Machine is supposed to work without eventually imploding. Is he god? What does he know that nobody else knows?

At what fiat price should Saylor stop getting in debt to buy bitcoin?

For me, it's also the least of my concerns whether he said the word "crypto". My concern is that he will never stop until his whole ponzi implodes. Even if he succeeds, I don't see anything to celebrate with having so much bitcoin concentrated in a single entity instead of spread out among plebs.

Bitcoin is backed by mining (physics). If physics is not a belief, then bitcoin is not based solely on belief, but on physical reality. The dollar and the other fiat currencies are based on belief ("the full faith and credit of...", whatever that means).

Thank you, sir. I hadn't looked into the replies to other tweets.

I cannot find any mention of bitcoin on his Twitter timeline since Nov 1st. Can you link to this tweet?