The strong with a functional underlying structure will survive. The ones with piss poor models using this to become a one trick pony/one hit wonder will fall. Just like bitcoin vs altcoins. But hey, i can’t tell the future, lets see🧐⚡️⚡️

Yes

Probably.

Better to pile in at the bottom of you're going to take a gamble.

Same circus, different clowns….except now the tent’s bigger and the clowns are drowning in their own delusion. When will these “treasury” folks learn that buying fairy dust at peak hype never made anyone rich, just broke and embarrassed

have an example?

Except it’s not an investment, it’s sound money

In the pic, what investment is the one with the +0.12% ROI?

Depending on your morgage however no fu chance not even close you‘ll be wrecked and lose significant purchasing power in btc terms. I learned my lesson the hard way in 2017 and 2021.

I like the frequent notes, it gets your message our there and makes you more impressionable. Keep it up!!

I guess the retail market no longer influential to the bitcoin price.

They mainly focus on the altcoins market

Think this is a really cool way to go, good luck🤘🏼love the show!

Pihole + unbound dns resolver

Nostr- You're on Nostr

Android- preferably grapheneos despite its limitations

Cash- where you can instead of card

Privacy-app that creates virtual cards to keep your info safe

Local notes from fdroid- app instead of cloud storage

Bitwarden self hosted instead of Google or apple passwords.

Can you tell me what the fucking point of college is if college graduates now have the same unemployment rate as non-college kids?

Married, kids, paid for house, and been stacking hard since 2020. Was a low time preference Bitcoiner before I found it.

Focusing on building a business with my kiddos now. My dad started a business for my brother and I for work in high school. Sold it 20 years later for my mom to retire. Want to teach them good life skills too.

Your argument’s a pile of nonsense, and you're dodging the points harder than a politician in a debate.

There is no credible professional, economist, institution, economic textbook, dictionary or government source (even including central banks) that contradicts the definition of fungibility as an inherent economic property tied to market acceptance rather than government control.

All of these sources agree unanimously that fungibility has nothing to do with everybody having to accept every note. That is an absurd claim.

Again, after this note I'll post a list of many economists from the time the term was first used until now, showing there universally agreed upon meaning of fungibility.

I'll also add definitions from legal dictionaries and institutions.

The universally accepted term meaning of fungibility is objectively as I described. Not the term you threw a tantrum about wanting it to be.

If you read the information instead of trying to protect your ego, you would have addressed the information with integrity and honesty, even if you couldn't refute them and not diverted the conversation every single time.

Bitcoin defunds authoritarianism, and I'll include in this note why transparency on the base layer is necessary for that, and how it enables privacy in perpetuity. I know it's not what you want to hear, so I'll expect more disrespectful pivoting.

But if you are willing, you should take the time to consider information other than what you want to be true.

We have all been wrong about things and no one is perfect. I of course have been wrong and am always trying to learn. It can definitely be hard to accept or be open to new information. I promise, if you had any compelling information or points, I would concede.

It's just obvious to every person who sees this, you went from gold to fungibility to a whole new topic here and none of the points you have made are well rounded, well researched or articulate.

It looks much more foolish to lash out or speak passionate with no credible information and obvious missteps and diversions to protect yourself from admitting you were wrong.

I'm not trying to argue with you or make you feel bad. For me this, and all conversations or about truth and progress, not bullshit. I wish you well sir.

Now, to respond again, you kept harping on UTXOs being traceable, but that’s irrelevant-fungibility isn’t about everyone accepting every unit; it’s about equal value in exchange, as Jevons (1875), Mises (1912), and all other economists, institutions, governments and textbooks spell out.

Fungibility isn’t about some arbitrary level of acceptance.

It’s about the market treating units as interchangeable with equal value, per all credible sources.

By your logic and definition, nothing’s fungible if a single person can say see that two units have differences which is laughably wrong. Or whatever you shift to other than this definitions.

Fungibility isn't about universal acceptance it's about a specific market treating units as equal in value.

For example, raffle tickets are fungible in a park where they're worth one ride each, even if the broader public outside sees them as worthless.

Similarly, satoshis are fungible because the market values them equally, regardless of some actors rejecting UTXOs.

It's not that every single person has to accept them; it's that the market's general agreement on equal value defines fungibility.

One satoshi equals another, just like one $10 bill equals another, even if a bank flags a serial number.

It’s like saying a worn out $10 bill isn’t fungible because a shop won’t take it, it’s still worth $10 to anyone who does.

Bitcoin’s satoshis are fungible because the market, not you or some exchange, sets their value as equal: 100 million satoshis = one Bitcoin, always. And your UTXO obsession? It’s a technical red herring.

Sure, some exchanges flag UTXOs for compliance, just like banks might reject marked cash or freeze accounts. That’s external regulation or choice, not a break in Bitcoin’s inherent fungibility.

Cash stays fungible despite serial number tracking-you agreed with that before! Bitcoin’s the same.

Your claim that any differentiation means non-fungible is absurd. By that logic, nothing’s fungible, not gold, not dollars, if someone, somewhere can be picky.

That’s not how economics works; fungibility’s about market-accepted value, not universal agreement.

Now, let’s flip to your Monero crush. Privacy’s great, but it’s not fungibility, stop mixing them up.

Bitcoin’s transparent base layer, as Nik Bhatia’s Layered Money explains, is a feature, not a bug. It ensures auditability, catching double spends or attacks like a 51% attempt, which Monero’s opacity risks hiding.

Transparency fuels trust and resilience anyone can verify the chain, spot threats, and react, from miners to newbies buying in to defend Bitcoin’s integrity.

And don’t sleep on Bitcoin’s Layer 2 solutions like Lightning Network. Open a payment channel, and you’ve got private, near instant transactions that can run indefinitely off chain, as you noted.

If someone tries to cheat, timelocks and watchtowers punish them. Trust? Minimal and backed by protocol rules, not blind faith.

Plus, with reputation and incentives, like big players wanting to protect their brand or small setups banking on mutual benefit Lightning channels stay open and private, no Monero needed.

Layer 2 solutions, like CoinJoin and eCash, only get better, building on Bitcoin’s rock solid base layer of transparency, immutability, and decentralization.

It’s like saying cash isn’t fungible because a few banks won’t take crumpled bills-give me a break.

Fungibility’s about the market agreeing one satoshi equals another, just like one digital dollar or a $10 bill equals another, even though they track cash, it's still fingible, same with gold, same with digital dollars.

Economists from Jevons (1875) to Hayek (1976) and sources like Investopedia and FasterCapital (2024) back this: fungibility’s an inherent property, not altered by some picky exchanges or government rules.

You’re trying to dodge the core issue by waving around UTXO traceability like it’s a gotcha, but it’s not, bitcoin’s satoshis hold equal value, period.

And back to your Monero fantasy. Privacy by default sounds cool, but it sacrifices transparency, which Bitcoin leverages for trust and resilience.

A transparent blockchain lets anyone spot threats, rally support, or build defenses like nodes rejecting bad blocks or new users jumping in to counter a state attack.

Monero’s opacity hides that, risking blind spots, it takes away any possible emergent reaction to any problem.

No one can react because no one can see the issue, and then, if someone can or does notice nefarious activity, significant trust is required for others to participate in defense.

Bitcoin’s open design allows for robust awareness and defense capabilities through trustlessness. Free market reputation and track record incentivize quality secondary layers that offer privacy.

Its transparency fuels its global adoption scarcity, divisibility, fungibility all intact, no matter how many times you cry UTXO. So, stop dodging with weak article links and twisted logic.

Bitcoin’s fungible at the satoshi level, and no amount of exchange flagging or your hand wringing changes that.

Primal has been the best by far ! I shell primal to people as if I own or am a dev on the team 😂

It's my preferred choice for zap wallet and it's so refined.

2 OF MY FAVORITE PEOPLE ON NOSTR THIS IS GOING TO BE LEGENDARY I CANT WAIT TO LISTEN TO THIS !!!!

Not for Bitcoin or investment advice.

Just hold Bitcoin, don't actually use it lol just hold it for 5 years than pay your capital gains tax when you sell it for dollars like good steeple lol fuck me.

Bitcoin is money. Not a fucking stock.

Fiat mind. They got Fiat mind.

"How can I make dollars from it"

Not "how do I make a better future for myself"

Just short term profit seeking Fiat mind.

I should have known they'd be retarded from the beginning with the whole yeah bro just rely on Grok instead of looking things up and fact checking it

Like shit. You buy a house so that you don't have to pay rent. So that you have more control over your living environment, so you can provide somewhere for your family to live.

This idea of housing being something that only exists to make a profit from is completely retarded.

And trying to compare owning a house to having money is retarded.

Bitcoin is money. A house is somewhere you can live.

Food is something you eat.

You can make an income providing food or housing to other people, you can make an income by trading stocks and investments.

Holding something doesn't make an income.

Owning a house or land that's not being used for anything, and then selling it later on to profit isn't just socially stupid but it's economically short sighted fiat minded thinking.

You can use land to make food.

You can use Bitcoin to buy the food.

You can use a house to live in.

You can use Bitcoin to buy a house.

I don't understand why it's so hard for podcast bros to grasp these ideas

This is literally how shitcoin investors think.

Bitcoin isn't about getting rich.

Bitcoin is just money, good money that won't devalue because it can't be printed infinitely.

Dollars pounds euros etc. are shit money, literally based on debt, loaned from private banks to governments with interest that we pay back as taxes while the debt continues to grow.

Bitcoin isn't increasing in value like a stock, even though it appears that way.

The increase in value to Bitcoin is purely coming from it's adoption as money and that increase in value is much smaller than the value of Bitcoin vs fiat.

What's actually happening is that fiat currency is devaluing.

The getting rich by holding Bitcoin is just a side effect of the other money being based on debt and having no limits.

Holding Bitcoin itself is like saving money, it's like having a pile of cash in a safe if you're using self custody wallet, or having money in the bank if you're using a custodial wallet.

The savings just doesn't devalue over time.

Land value goes up when the land is improved or when the value of neighbouring lands go up because of development or whatever.

The price rising doesn't reflect value rising, the price of food going up isn't because the food takes more energy to produce.

Houses are cheaper to build and food is cheaper to produce than it used to be.

The whole "cost of living crisis" is just the debt backed infinitely printable currency losing value.

You buy land and use Bitcoin to escape that shit, not add to it.