Topic: Bitcoin 101: Share an Unpopular Opinion you hold about Bitcoin with Newbies (Read 363 times)

That will truthfully be supporting the theory of apocalypse and rightly so. There's so much evil in the world today. About the $1M mark for Bitcoin, I'm of the opinion that isn't likely to happen. This is because I believe with time in the near future, Bitcoin will lose steam to maintain that number one spot. Perhaps, that's the only unpopular view I've of Bitcoin at the moment.

Can we agree this might only be a temporary issue though?  Bitcoin is going to be so much easier to understand by the time today's newborns are of our age.  Think of it like smart phones.  How many people in their 30s and older struggled with learning how to use a smart phones versus how many kids did.  Technology is interesting for kids.  And when they know they can make money for video games, they will learn so much quicker.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

My unpopular opinion is the mining aspect of Bitcoin. I understand that it is necessary for the PoW algorithm, but I really think it is energy inefficient and wasteful. It is not something I would necessarily share with newbies but I do really think we should move beyond the miners.

It's very obvious that what causes the down fall of newbie in any steps they make in cryptocurrency is lack of information, directly to the point. Newbies have to make a positive research of a particular coin before investing. Actually in due circumstances, we don't have to purchase a coin when the price length is the accelerating motion, and any coin that you want to hold or holding should be coin that have volatility and can not be eliminated in the market with degradation of price.

As explained above: roll-back each and every transaction coming from the addresses you want to censor.
They still "have" their coins, and they will be able to spend them once you stop censoring them.

In general, as long as you control 51% of the mining capacity, you can roll-back any transaction originating from any number of "blacklisted" addresses, and thereby "censor" them.
It's not easy, it's not cheap, but if you want to stop somebody from spending their coins, it can be done.

The other way round could apply for a few things. Maybe Bitcoin price can be one of them and some popular male organ, but certainly not for most shitcoins 

Having seen documentaries of how towns, cities or communities would grow from zero to the highest level of activity due to a Gold rush or some precious mineral in the area and then back to near zero once the mineral either got exhausted or people moved on to the next "Gold rush" I came to peace with what might happen to crypto space in the future. Maybe people will lose interest, Maybe people will move onto the next "big thing"

I mean look at coal today, Imagine what it was like during the industrial revolution 

I think people don’t really understand the concept of vitality when it comes to bitcoin. There is a misconception that the price of bitcoin cannot go below a certain amount. I don’t know where they derive this, maybe from Bitcoin price history. I’m of the opinion that bitcoin can get to $0 as easily as the price of bitcoin can get to $100k.

Investing in Bitcoin is not a get rich quick scheme. It's not a Ponzi scheme like most folks in my country think. It's like investing or holding a currency because you have confidence it it's future. You must be patient and courageous to venture into it. Don't you use your entire income or savings to invest in it because no currency is prone to volatility. Also invest the amount you can handle when the unimaginable happens. But generally Bitcoin is one of the safest, cheapest and most reliable means of payment.

I didn't say I wasn't nitpicking .

Alright, I see the angle you're coming from. That's quite possibly true. I mean, I've always said I'd rather not find out who Satoshi is, because there definitely have been accusations of who they may have been, and actually confirming any of that could potentially cause issues for Bitcoin. You know, if there's an accusation that he's a criminal, and then that's proven correct, I can see that being an issue.


What do you mean by censor? Like completely remove them from the network or redistribute them somehow? Not sure I would agree with either, I mean who gives us the right to touch someone else's coins, regardless how inactive or how problematic they could be?

I'm not saying you're wrong though, that's just my personal view point. I'm sure many people would actually advocate for doing something with Satoshi's coins.

That's nitpicking
At the same time, it doesn't really matter for the argument wether satoshi's million BTC are true or not.
The mere fact that it is unknown yet likely is enough for it to be a destabilizing factor.
Which in turn could lead to countermeasures in the form of regulation, which in turn could lead to 51% attacks "by the government".

Scenario: a major bank / hedge funds in the US decides to invest in BTC on a large scale, even if only on behalf of its customers.
Funds are being setup, bonds issued, CFDs prepared, loans given on the collateral of swaps of those CFDs on bonds of funds, you get the idea.
Sooner or later, the whole thing becomes "too big to fail", because - greed & Wall Street.
Now, for whatever reason, a rumor appears that satoshi might just be an evil foreign power, and the whole financial house of cards is about to come crashing down.

There's a "simple" remedy for this: censor satoshi's coins.
How is that possible? Easy. If you control 51% you can roll-back any transaction with these coins.

There's your scenario with a non-zero likelihood of happening where satoshi's coins, even without being moved at all (or even being his in the first place) could lead to 51%-attack-capability* on behalf of "the government" / "Wall Street".
How likely is that scenario?
I honestly don't know.

* 51%-attack-capability is basically what you need to prevent unwanted transactions from happening. If you control 51%, no-one will issue a transaction that you would censor anyway. There's a downside to this: you will need to keep up your 51%-attack-capability indefinitely.

Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency ecosystem reconceptualizes how money is being transferred, spent and invested.
if you can stomach the volatility of Bitcoin and look at the overall performance when compared to other asset over the past years, Bitcoin is a safe heaven.
Invest wisely as this new digital money system is swift and revolutonal, therefore it also comes with huge risk.

Right. Even securing Bitcoin probably needs to become a little easier. I do believe that hardware wallets have brought us leaps, and bounds in terms of ease of use. However, there's an additional cost to that, whereas a lot of people will not want that additional expense.

Even if we say that's their problem, really we should be considering it our problem since adoption means making it as easy as possible to not only understand, but to access the most secure ways, without actually understanding security to a good level. Fiat you currently can do that, at the expense of a third party. I imagine in a decade or so, banks will be offering their services for Bitcoin, at least the security aspect. Now, for me personally I would never entertain the idea of using a bank for the majority of my wealth again, but I have to admit some people will probably benefit from it.

Yeah, I'm not sure we're ever going to overcome that mentality. Humans like convenience, and the non reversible aspect of Bitcoin only really appeals to certain types of people. I guess what we could see in the future is a organisation which has a large share of the network, which offers a chargeback service by trying to reverse transactions that have been made fraudulently. I mean, I think we're starting to get into tin foil hat territory there as the costs wouldn't likely justify it, but that might play a part in the justification for having a large network share.  

Not even because of the cost in doing so (which I'm ignoring for now), but the fact that you're then raising the bar for accessibility since mining takes a bit of knowledge to get going.

Welsh just beat me to the punch by mentioning the technical difficulties that most people are likely to experience if they want to use bitcoin.  I would like to see more user-friendly applications and devices make safety, security, privacy easier to attain for the less technically skilled (like my mom.)

The other issue that I think some newbies have a hard time accepting is that bitcoin transactions are not reversible.  Obviously it's a safety feature on one side of the transaction, but since most consumers have become used to being coddled by big banks, they just assume that they can change their minds about a purchase after the fact.  That mentality needs to be reversed.


It's been so long since that pile of coins has been touched, I think it's safe to assume that those coins may never move.  If I'm wrong about that, those coins account for less than 5% of the total supply.  Still a significant amount, and they could cause panic if they were all to be dumped at once, but again I have my doubts about that ever happening.


This is probably the most concerning of issues that faces bitcoin.  A wealthy, rouge, government could decide to attack the network for a variety of reasons.  It's impractical to expect everyone who owns bitcoin to contribute to mining, but that would be a practical preventive measure.

Depends what you specifically mean by "ticking time bomb", but if it's the case that Satoshi dumped the coins in one go(which isn't smart to start with) — sure the price will crash undoubtedly, but it's also undoubtedly going to be a temporary event. If anything, I'd be drooling to buy.

I have a few:

- Bitcoin is too difficult for mass adoption, whether that's as a mainstream currency or a reserve fund type currency.

- While having the freedom to be your own bank, it doesn't suit everyone, and could present problems if mass adoption ever did occur.

That's based on speculation which has yet to be proven. You might be right, but I don't think we can label this a truth until it's in fact a truth.

Potentially, although the cost justification would be huge. I guess as less miners are mining in the future, due to no more block rewards, then it's probably more of a possibility. However, that's so far away, I'm not going to be around to see it.

Governments are still not happy about Bitcoin but rather pretend they appreciate and support its existence.  I personally say it is a little bit foolish to believe Bitcoin is truly entering a phase of general acceptance.  They rather did their homework for the past decade and now try their hardest to find alternative ways to destroy Bitcoin's core principles.

The 'decentralized' part of how Bitcoin works is going to become somewhat illegal in a matter of years.  You can still use Bitcoin peer to peer but you can also clearly see a shrinkage of the right of using it this way without getting the 'Suspect' label on your forehead and it is getting increasingly harder to avoid third parties and intrusive procedures of identification.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

Not so much "unpopular opinions" but rather inconvenient truths:
- as a monetary system, Bitcoin is not limited to 21 Million (the network itself is)
- the fact that satoshi, an unknown, possibly hostile entity, holds a sizable share of coins, is a ticking time bomb
- 51% attacks as a means of "regulation" could become a common reality in the future, if government interference leads to control over a majority of miners

I'd actually say that it's the reverse. For bitcoin to be a better and more viable currency, it needs to go through a long painful speculative/investment phase first. And when we're at the point of bitcoin having a good amount of liquidity to the point that it's going to be pretty difficult to pump/crash the price, then it will be a far better and more viable currency.

• Incase bitcoin investment fails you or disappoints you by going dip against your portfolio, remember bitcoin is first a currency before it's an investment asset
• Hey newbie! We are late to the game, don't expect that bitcoin will make you reach tomorrow. Wait for years and you will enjoy
• If you are a bitcoin hodler, an investment in other coins is not diversification

Does the other way around also apply?