Topic: Bitcoinaires (Read 248 times)

A millionaire is someone who has 1M and more in any currency, be it the dollars, pounds, yen etc.

The term "bitcoinair"is limited, because l if adopted will mean someone with 1M worth btc or more. What about someone with over 1M worth digital currency that is not necessarily "bitcoin", let's say ETH, will that person still be referred to as a "bitcoinaire"?

I think the most appropriate term for this is "Cryptonaire" that is someone with over a million worth crypto currency ( be it btc or any other).

mmm... that is frowned upon

Some of us just haven't bothered recovering our old accounts and instead created *new* accounts

You are right. But if you go on this direction you'll be making too small difference between bitcoiner and bitcoinaire, hence the use of the word bitcoinaire be avoided and "more English" bitcoiner be used instead.
But I am not a linguist and I think that perception is more important than etymology. Maybe I am wrong with this too.

Some of them are definitely here. My guess is that Theymos and some of the old guys are around just for a chat among themselves and perhaps a for a certain sense of custodians of history, but at this point my guess is that they are certainly financially free.

I was attracted to the forum to learn, share and make a buck here and there. While I am far from being an expert, I have reached a point that it is just a pass-time.

I am a bit tired of the very low level of many discussions on politics, economy, markets and of the forum being used for political campaigns and the like.

It is fine to have your own views, but there should be some short of notion of what is a fact and is just an opinion. I think that the way politics have been conducted in the UK and the US during the last 5 years has put at the same level facts and beliefs - not that hasn´t been the case in large bits of the US for many decades and not that this is not the case in most of the social platforms in the internet.

Anyway, I guess this forum has is still very useful for many people, but those that are sipping their Daiquiris on a tax heaven are not keen on using their time mingling here anymore as there is little of interest for them here.

Well if those of us who are left started some interesting discussions, and supported others,thenperhaps we could attract them back.

I wonder how many of them still read the boards here .

Thanks and hail to you master of the of intelligence and Overlord of the sceptics  


My guess is that most of the legendaries that are no longer active have decided that they have better things to do with their time yeah.

I've already gotten into the habit of saying "bitcents" when referencing 0.01 bitcoin.

I'm not fond of pegging the term to USD or any other fiat. How about we just create a term for a person who holds more than 1 BTC, another term for someone who holds more than 10 BTC, and another for one that holds more than 100 BTC?

And a billionaire would own a million billions, whatever that means. A million billion is a quadrillion, so a billionaire would be a quadrillionaire, and a million million is a trillion, so a millionaire would be a trillionaire. Hmmm, that's not working out very well ...

I'm glad this thread has gotten responses on a board that is so dead, even if most don't agree with what I say. Once I've stated the idea, I think I'll stop commenting on the thread although I'll leave it open.


Yes, of course. I just had that idea, and language is too complex to think that now I make up a meaning for that word, and everybody is going to use it like that. And even if everyone in this forum started using it, that doesn't guarantee that it would be adopted in the rest of society.

That said, personally, "whale" seems too indeterminate to me, and my definition is more concrete but, as I say ,maybe people will continue to use that term or start using another one to refer to people who are Bitcoin wealthy.


Really? I think I have stated my definition various times and it is pretty clear but I'll repeat it again: a Bitcoinaire is someone with Bitcoin holdings equivalent to a house of a median price in the US plus 10x the median income (in the US, but you can apply it to other developed countries).

Anyone owning a Satoshi isn't able to buy a house and even less with the rest of the Satoshi is going to have 10x the median salary.

It will probably never be used as such, but it will serve as a frame of reference for me to measure wealth, no matter how much purchasing power the dollar (or any of the other fiat currencies) loses and how much purchasing power the Bitcoin gains.

Of course you are correct, but it seems to be public perception that matters these days. For example, Bitcoin is npt a coin, and a bit of it is a Satoshi.
Given that  nobody owns a million Bitcoin at the moment ( except perhaps the Fed), it's a bit academic, so maybe we should just stick with calling the big bag holders "whales". By your definition, any one who owns a Satoshi would be a bitcoinaire.

Also


Why? The suffix -aire doesn't mean "someone who has a million something". Would you say a legionnaire is someone who owns a million legions? I'll answer for you, no you wouldn't.

Actually let's see what it means: "a suffix that forms nouns denoting a person characterized by or occupied with that named by the stem, occurring in loanwords from French: concessionaire; legionnaire;millionaire."

So if we look at the meaning of concessionaire: "the holder of a concession or grant, especially for the use of land or commercial premises or for trading rights" or legionaire: "a member of a legion, in particular an ancient Roman legion or the French Foreign Legion." we could say that a Bitcoinaire is someone who holds Bitcoin or is a member of the Bitcoin world. If we want to add the sense of "millionaire" we can specify parameters of what you can buy with your Bitcoin holdings that do not depend on the depreciation of fiat or the appreciation of Bitcoin, but no, the suffix -aire doesn't mean "someone who has a million something".


That's what I'm trying to say. But ten years after that it may mean a wealthy person who owns less than one Bitcoin. I think we can establish an objective measure if we talk about someone whose Bitcoin holdings are worth a median house in the US (or the UK or the Euro zone) and 10x the median income.

I also agree with JetCash.
Bitcoinaire should mean somebody who owns 1,000,000 bitcoin.
If one owns 17.3+ BTC (at 57.5k$) I would maybe call him millionaire (since the million is in USD).



Most probably they were on this forum. But quite probably they are no longer here, instead they are busy enjoying life.

I say what I believe, and I research and observe the basis for my beliefs. Welcome to the world of intelligent scepticism.

At some point, a "bitcoinaire" may mean a wealthy person who owns just a single bitcoin.

the only bitcoinaires are probably the pseudonym 'satoshi' and some exchanges that have a stash that totals 1mill coin

my btc if i totalled it and valued it in fiat. is enough to say millionaire. but thats fiat.
i dont consider myself a bitcoinaire by having coin that values to a fiat millionare

..
though i do agree with the other bit about detaching value from the fiat inflation.
for years i have been hinting about the COL(cost of living) value index. or more simply the bread loaf value

if you can afford to buy 1million bred loaves in any currency your a millionaire

Yeah, that's for sure. I also believe that it has more of a future as a store of value than as a currency. If you live in the UK you can think of something similar but in pounds, those in the Euro zone in Euros, etc., but the frame of reference has always been the dollar. When global statistics of millionaires in the world are made, they take as a reference $1M, it is not worth counting those who have 1 million Bolivarian pesos, for example.

Well Bitcoin has the potential to be a currency, but with a 40 to 50 minute confirmation time, and no guarantee based on immediate settlement, I don't believe it will even become a mass payment instrument. I believe it will take its place alongside gold and silver as a store of wealth, and it has many advantages in this role. That will be much better for me as well.
I'm not really interested in comparing it with the declining dollar either. In fact I only check price movements and trades against Sterling.

It would be more like to have so much in Bitcoin to buy a median house in the USA and 10X the USA household median income, to summarize what I said before.

I think if Bitcoin is adopted massively, whether it replaces the dollar or not, that term, or some similar one will have to be used, because at the rate the Fed is printing, $1M is going to lose half purchasing power in a few years 1 a BTC is going to gain a lot of purchasing power. So, if 10 years from now, to give an example, we have a group of people whose main wealth is in Bitcoin, I guess it won't make much sense to call them millionaires.

My reaction to the word "bitcoinaires" was that iut referred to people with a million Bitcoin. Well I haven't quite made it to that lofty height, but I am a Satoshiaire.