Your pedantry doesn't factor that the term "Hispanic" refers to the race of people indigenous to America that mixed with the European Spanish. And "white" refers to a majority genetic western European.
Can the government stop using Czar as a job title? Are 17th century Russians here or what?
The Case For Gold Is Incontrovertible
https://www.zerohedge.com/precious-metals/case-gold-incontrovertible
We get it, Zerohedge shills for gold.
I could make the argument that knock-on effects of time preference lowering hard money causes the consumer to behave in this way. But, I'm sure you know that anyway.
I am getting to Satoshi levels of "If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry." with friends, family, and Nostriches. Some of y'all need to read Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard and stop repeating things coders and the television tell you.
Okay, I'll assume I am wrong. What is the suggested remedy? What flaw is MSTR exploiting? What is MSTR doing that is impeding your or anyone else's sovereignty?
A lot of assumptions are made here. I hold BTC (theoretically) unless I trade them for goods I will always have them. Anyone else who abhors fiat as I do will accept BTC in exchange for goods as well. This is an economy. The fact that I can take worthless fiat (in my opinion) and trick an exchange or other BTC holder into giving BTC to me is short lived.
I know eventually people will only exchange BTC for material goods or labor. In that paradigm MSTR has to make a decision:
Start using their treasury for capitalist ventures (loans, MSTR business expansion, buying property) or hold their treasury and expand circulated BTC value.
Loans will carry high risk unless borrowers collateralize with other assets. Even then interest on loans maybe antiquated/obsolete. Instead only staked loans will be given. I.E. someone opens a new business with BTC loan MSTR gets a 10% stake in the business for a term in lieu of interest.
I also don't see how buying assets, goods, or labor with BTC would somehow flow back to MSTR. When BTC is the monetary heavyweight, no one will be exchanging USD for BTC (which is required for MSTR to acquire it.)
So, I hope this assuages the fears. Although I can't logically assuage a feeling of jealously because it is an illogical emotion.
Use a PPLNS pool I suppose, or get rekt by "Theoretical Profit allocation"
I feel the same regardless. I Solo mine and PPLNS mine. I will never tell someone that they can't risk their assets for immediate gains.
I mean for privacy.
Having a payment channel/account for the right to use a hosted server.(exposed IP)
Versus
Your own Tor routed server that you control.
Which is more private in your estimation?
The same I guess? Because of the divisibility of BTC the world could run on a single bitcoin if you wanted. The divisibility doesn't stop at 8 decimal places.
Oh how do you have a more anonymous payment/account than a For routed personal server? That's a real feat.
I just think they are the most likely to succeed as a payment model. What kills FPPS pools is economic reality.
The dollar is infinite the BTC is not. Who will sell their BTC for dollars in this paradigm? The limit is where MSTR asks how many dollars for your sats and you say no. You are projecting your current view of the dollar onto the worthless digits it will become. If you never sell, and only you and MSTR have BTC you are equally empowered.
Just natural consequences of a Keynesian approach to mining. They are trying to quantify probabilities. That always leads to deficits and rug pulls.
If you want to be alluring to miners just be honest. A PPLNS system seems the most congruent with reality. Win a block, get paid according to your contribution. That's all.
Lol, k. I would ask how but that assumption is so loaded I will just let you have that opinion knocking around in your head.
If they hold forever, or lose their coins, it is a pro ratadonations to the rest of the network. If anything the longer they hold the more valuable YOUR stack becomes. I don't understand the logic you are employing here.
I don't see what the issue is here. Are they using their bitcoin holdings to pay for wars? To pay assassins? To buy up market goods and destroy them? Of what risk do you speak?
Bitcoin is money. They are no more dangerous to the network than you are with your stack. Bitcoins is just stored value. How they deploy the value is either better or worse for them and involves no one else.
You can have that if you want it. Wanting it means vigilance that most people are to lazy to embody. This is akin to someone saying "Everyone should be able to have 6-pack abs if they want."
THEY CAN.
It's just very difficult and the cost benefit analysis just doesn't work for most people.