I tend to feel out of sync with most of the people. I'm saying GM when it is afternoon for them and close to time for them to say GN and vice versa. It makes me feel weird doing the GM when I know it is later in the day for them.

Yeah, *should. I'm a mathy kinda dude, and I've looked for the cheapest deal. It ends up being something like $10/lbs for what I mentioned, if I recall correctly.

You know... I stop by McD's to get some meat cookies sometimes if I'm in a pinch (order online a triple from the value menu without bun and add a pattie). Beef is beef. Not the highest quality, but still...

I have been reading different things about the culture divide in border states in the lead up to the Civil War. Churches splitting into two and such. I agree with you, I think we are living through that period now - the lead up to a Civil War.

Aussie Peso actually 😆

What about Japan?

Value is indeed subjective. Which is why your argument contradicts itself. Whether or not you find the idea of Bitcoin useful is up to you. The satoshis does not exist, except in your head. They're literally a secret you keep. How much you are willing to give up that secret for, is up to you. It is also up to you what you're willing to pay for someone else's secret.

Don't find Bitcoin valuable? Then don't use it.

I don’t disagree. Unfortunately it would be a wasted vote tho 🤷‍♂️

Yes I'm DQing the candidate who said a worm at part of his brain & ruined any chance he had 🤣🤌

The claim that "A ledger has value because it represents something real" is a profound misinterpretation when applied to Bitcoin. To suggest that Bitcoin's ledger is "useful but not scarce" because it can be duplicated demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of where the true scarcity and utility of Bitcoin lie.

Scarcity in Bitcoin does not arise merely from its data, which can indeed be copied, but from the network's consensus and the immense computational power securing it—elements that are unique to the original Bitcoin timechain and not replicable. This network consensus, combined with proof of work, endows Bitcoin with its distinctive scarcity.

Your assertion that "If Bitcoin is a ledger entry, it is scarce but not useful" overlooks the primary utility of Bitcoin: providing a decentralized, censorship-resistant, and trustless form of money. This allows individuals to transact and store value without reliance on fallible institutions, which is profoundly useful.

Bitcoin's ledger doesn’t need to represent something physical to have value. Its value derives from its network's ability to enforce a reliable, predictable monetary policy, beyond the control of any central authority. Dismissing Bitcoin’s utility and scarcity based on a misunderstanding of its distributed ledger over a wide global network ignores its profound impact on our understanding of what money can be in a digital age.

The claim that "A ledger has value because it represents something real" is a profound misinterpretation when applied to Bitcoin. To suggest that Bitcoin's ledger is "useful but not scarce" because it can be duplicated demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of where the true scarcity and utility of Bitcoin lie.

Scarcity in Bitcoin does not arise merely from its data, which can indeed be copied, but from the network's consensus and the immense computational power securing it—elements that are unique to the original Bitcoin timechain and not replicable. This network consensus, combined with proof of work, endows Bitcoin with its distinctive scarcity.

Your assertion that "If Bitcoin is a ledger entry, it is scarce but not useful" overlooks the primary utility of Bitcoin: providing a decentralized, censorship-resistant, and trustless form of money. This allows individuals to transact and store value without reliance on fallible institutions, which is profoundly useful.

Bitcoin's ledger doesn’t need to represent something physical to have value. Its value derives from its network's ability to enforce a reliable, predictable monetary policy, beyond the control of any central authority. Dismissing Bitcoin’s utility and scarcity based on a misunderstanding of its distributed ledger over a wide global network ignores its profound impact on our understanding of what money can be in a digital age.

It is inaccurate to say that Bitcoin is nothing at all. Bitcoin can seem like many things to many people, so when all the excess descriptions are stripped away, it can appear to be nothing at all. But in reality, Bitcoin is simply a ledger, one that more and more people are opting into every day.

All money is a ledger, and always has been. Most forms of money rely on physical objects -- gold, salt, rai stones, glass beads, cloth strips, sea shells, paper notes, etc -- to represent entries on the ledger. More recently, banks have used intangible trust in their systems to represent entries on their centralized digital ledgers, as a replacement even for paper notes. Given that this trust is misplaced and easily destroyed, it could one day be accurate to say that fiat currency is, in reality, nothing at all.

Conversely, Bitcoin uses unchangeable and verifiable math and physics, rather than mere trust. Math and physics may likewise be intangible, but they're absolutely real and completely indestructible. These make Bitcoin the most real money humanity has ever had.

show don’t tell