Topic: El Salvador has become the first country to make #Bitcoin legal tender! 🇸🇻 - page 113. (Read 43449 times)

Any news on the Bitcoin citizenship investment program in El Salvador?

Right, we have different views on some terms. Your position is clear enough but I don't agree with it. I see that you are worried about possible misunderstanding but you are the only one who misunderstood me with my terminology as for now.


Returning to an idea of correct words: I never named "bitcoin education or implementation in El Salvador as a failure" so no one expects you to agree with such strange idea. I talked about problems and the ways of their solving, it is definitely not the same.

If to talk in general it doesn't really matter what way of adoption a random country chooses for bitcoin unless it's a kind of criminal ban on using or holding: bitcoin gives a lot of benefits even with just its existence. Being a competitive alternative it can give interesting options for using directly but even for those who don't use it directly it gives benefits anyway as bank system is motivated to be more client-oriented not to lose clients.

But as I do believe that it can give benefits from it's direct using and see that 71% of Salvadorians don't see the same while they've got all possible enabling legislative regulation for bitcoin I wonder what's the reason: if Salvadorians would knew what I know they'd definitely said that they have benefits from bitcoin adoption, so I conclude that the problem is in lack of knowledge. And the solution is in additional education.

I believe that I said what I wanted to say and how I wanted to say it.  We can agree to disagree, and I stand by my previous posts including my repeated criticisms of what I concluded to be the ongoingly vague language that you had chosen to use especially when you seemed to have only been willing to use the word bitcoin or even admit that you were talking about bitcoin after a lot of probing.. so I doubt that any kind of a problem, to the extent that there is any has to do with my seeking language clarification from you, and your several times recharacterizing my concerns into other diverging discussions.  

From my point of view your earlier conduct to communicate in seemingly intentional vagueness (which perhaps you had not intended to be vague?) that you have somewhat subsequently clarified seems to have had contributed to some of the confusion and even some of my increased hostility towards some of your seemingly ongoing dancing around the topic, even if you proclaim to have had good intentions in terms of your purportedly wanting folks to be more educated about the topic of bitcoin and/or crypto, which I cannot really have objections to those kinds of goals of better educating of folks even if we may well disagree about if you have any great teaching skills  based on your already expression of ideas on the topic and the fact that it has taken several back and forths for you to clarify aspects that you should have been able to clarify much earlier.. but anyhow.. you do you..

So sure, it does seem that I had previously concluded that your ongoing vague use of the term crypto (that you have subsequently defined in not necessarily a bad way) seemed to have been having the opposite effect in terms of educating folks about bitcoin and/or crypto (within your description of the concept of how you believe the bitcoin/crypto matter should be considered and your purported goals that people should be better educated on the topic of bitcoin from a broader perspective that goes beyond bitcoin.. ).  

Sure our view are different, but may well not be completely incompatible.. depending on context.... even though I will stand by any assertion that any of us need to be careful not to cause too much confusion when we are using the term crypto (and I question motives when people believe it is actually helpful to present matters like that in such vagueness and expect that they are clarifying matters or are more enlightened because of their use of broad and vague language like that) - especially when we are talking about bitcoin (as I already mentioned several times) and if we are also failing/refusing to use the term bitcoin in order to clarify what the fuck we are talking about.. which you seem to want to continue to employ that kind of seemingly vague language in a way that you are proclaiming to be a more enlightened approach.. and of course, I do not agree with that kind of nonsensical approach as being helpful even if you are proclaiming that yur goals are to teach and clarify when you seem to be doing the opposite through your stubborn assertion that you plan to stick with your ways of talking.. because you fear the language police and you want your freedoms of expression.. hahahahaha even though surely you have the right to speak however you like.. and I have the right to continue to proclaim that your way of speaking seems to be intentionally confusing.. if that is how you choose to continue to proceed to talk about bitcoin matters in vague ways that make it look like you are engaging in deceptive and misleading false equivalencies of bitcoin and shitcoins through such vagueness.. whether that is your intent or not. .which you seem to be suggesting that purposefully creating confusion is not your intention.. but based on your ongoing stubbornness and even more recent assertive and seemingly self-righteous assertions on the topic I have my doubts.    


I am glad that you appreciate that concept.. .. even though from my perspective, your valuing correct word usage still leads you and me to have differing views about the value of using the term crypto when talking about bitcoin and bitcoin's relationship to cryptocurrency and whether your use of the term crypto may well carry a lot of baggage about shitcoins based on actual happenings in the world.. rather than merely some abstract academic use of the proper use of the term when applying the use of the term to actual happenings in the world....and whether it matters or not..  which it seems to matter.


That's good.  Devil still might be in the details, no?


Even though I would not agree with any characterization of bitcoin education or implementation in El Salvador as a failure, it seems that we do not disagree about those kinds of general overall principles and assessments that there may well need to be more education efforts.. but surely it might be easy to know exactly without a bit more assessment of what is happening on the ground and both the Government and the El Salvadorean people would be in a better position for that than guys on a bitcoin talk forum, but surely if accurate information is coming out about bitcoin related progress that might be happening on the ground then there might be some ideas and assessments regarding some of the areas that might be in need to be improved or areas that might need more attention, but still seems like those are the kinds of assessments and factual gathering and even community tailored goals that on the ground governments would be striving to make those kinds of assessments.. or even to publish those kinds of factual representations if there might be any need for putting money, time and efforts into gathering such data in order that they can be Monday morning quarterbacked by foreigners.. to the extent that we are in a position to assess from the data that we have or even if we went for a visit we may or may not be able to see all aspects of what is happening in the streets
 or on the ground in behind the scene ways, too..

Yes, I'm still sure that I used terms correctly in how I want to say. It is about term hierarchy: crypto is a general term for everything in this topic like technology, practical cryptography, economy specifics, way of using, cryptocurrencies etc.; bitcoin is one of cryptocurrencies and is a part of crypto. So if I want to say that people should understand the idea of decentralization for instance is is a part of basics of crypto and then bitcoin is an example (may be even an only one, not sure) of a true decentralized currency. If you learn just bitcoin you can know that it is a decentralized currency but to understand what is a decentralized currency as an idea you need wider education. And you can learn crypto basics focusing on bitcoin only, and it would be still incorrect to say that it is bitcoin learning, it is bitcoin focused learning of crypto basics.

And I already answered your question earlier that I don't mean altcoins promotion under crypto education. You are the only one who interpreted my words that way. It is strange to say obvious things each time: everyone knows that we are talking in a topic about that "El Salvador has become the first country to make Bitcoin legal tender".


Wow! You divided a group of arguments for highlighting a problem with not enough crypto education (yes, I still use this term as your arguments against it are not convincing for me) to start a new discourse! Knowing a problem is a first step for overcoming it. "The sleeping fox catches no poultry" and to get results a work for it should be done.


I answered your question previously. So it is not a problem of my words. It is a problem of your attitude to words: it seems that you don't want to clarify what did I want to say but to make me speaking up like you like. If you want so you need more convincing arguments, not imposing.


Using words correctly is a value.


Really? I answered already what do I mean and that I don't mean that basic crypto education have to contain altcoin promotion.


Yes, it is what I said from the very beginning: to get better results in bitcoin adoption in El Salvador better education in this topic is needed as Salvadorians IMO (statistics shows that) don't have enough information about is's nature and benefits.

El Salvador president Nayib Bukele faced terrible situation except with talking close your eye and stop checking the market situation or price right now, lets busy your self enjoy holiday or keep working. I know how many people frustrated when buying bitcoin on the top or highest price actually trough on ATH. Become weakness nowadays what faced by Nayib Bukele for his competitor how to explore bad reputation him after give allowed as bitcoin legal currency transaction payment. I am waiting what respond from El Salvador president Nayib Bukele when getting some his people against with his decision to make bitcoin as legal transaction payment, he has prepare with good reason or still confusing how to explain with bitcoin price nowadays.

Well, I don't know.  It seems that you were the one who was making that kind of an educational connection because even to attempt to justify your use of the word "crypto" or "crypto currency," you were asserting that Salvadoreans need to be educated in a direction beyond focusing on bitcoin or at least it was not really clear what you meant.. when you seem to not even use the word bitcoin in your first post and just repeating a vague-ass concept of crypto or crypto currencies  and still I am not really very clear why you still believe that there is some kind of a practical justification to continue to want to talk about "crypto" when El Salvador had passed a bitcoin law and is trying to focus on bitcoin in its ongoing  implementation efforts, and it seems to me that we should not even need to devolve into this direction of needing to talk about why you seem to to believe that there is an ongoing need to justify the use of the term crypto in this discussion.. It continues to seem like a big ass distraction to me.

In your first post or even your subsequent posts, if you had just tried to focus on bitcoin, then I probably would not have said much of anything regarding your various continuous vague assertions about why why there are some needs to continue to talk about these kinds of matters in ways that go beyond various bitcoin focuses that seem to be carried out in El Salvador.  


Seems like a BIG so fucking what to me.  The efforts are ongoing in El Salvador.  The announcement of the plan to make bitcoin legal tender is just one year, and the actual implementation is only a bit more than 9 months.  There are other metrics to show that progress is being made in regards to more usage and more awareness of bitcoin.. so the mere fact that supposedly 71 are proclaiming that they have not benefitted may well hardly reflect much of anything except that a lot of outreach is still necessary.


Your conclusion is that a majority of El Salvadoreans need to "learn about crypto" because they are too apathetic about the whole matter?  

Or could a very similar conclusion be possible if you just changed your proclamation to be about bitcoin?  

So in order for us to attempt to both stay on topic and attempt to talk about what is going on in El Salvador, you could say it like this:

"An overwhelming quantity of El Salvadoreans (maybe over 70%?) are too apathetic about bitcoin.  The El Salvadorean government must work harder to contribute towards their becoming more aware about the possible benefits of bitcoin."


Is that what you are wanting to say?

I could give less than two shits in regards to your desire to change the topic, because my reason towards responding to you in the first place had to do with your vague-ass use of the term crypto.. so I can figure out what the fuck you are talking about.. so now if you have changed the topic and you are largely talking about bitcoin and you want to say that you believe that the El Salvadorean government is failing in their educational and implementation efforts in regards to bitcoin, then no problem.. at least I have a wee bit better understanding regarding what points that you were wanting to make.  If that was what you were wanting to proclaim?


Oh?  You want to also say that you don't like governments and you do no trust them.  Maybe you will trust the politicians more if they start to talk in gobbledy-gook speak and start throwing out vague-ass terms, like crypto? when they mean bitcoin, no?  If they start using the term "crypto" and talking about "crypto", then that should hale you to trust the politicians more, no?


I wasn't talking about any of that... or at least that was not my intention.. I was just trying to get you to clarify what you meant by crypto and how that relates to El Salvador's bitcoin law implementation.


Ok.. Again. .you are proclaiming that the El Salvadorean government is not doing enough to contribute towards better bitcoin adoption/education, and you believe that the suggestions that you made in regards to a possible better course of action may well be helpful to them to make some better progress.  

Alright.. Hopefully some representative from El Salvador is reading your suggestions so that they can receive some potential wise counsel about how easy their solutions might end up being towards making better bitcoin adoption and better education of their populace.

That is the reality. Many newbies are blind gamblers and it usually turn wrong for many newbie investors. Bitcoin and the cryptocurrency market itself has a natural bait which attracts the newbies mostly at the bull run. This happens when people who already invested at low run into massive profits. They will eventually be attracted to join the train. And unfortunately for them, it will be towards the ending of the bull run, and when the invest things turn the other way round.

As pointed out by you, many doesn't have investment plans, they jump in with what they call life savings and put all. Sitting back to watch the miracle, things might go wrong. Then they will not be patient enough to wait for another rise in the market.

We talked about what is bitcoin and what is crypto and now are changing the subject to education itself, okay. What do we have? 71% of Salvadorians say that they didn't benefit from bitcoin adoption. Over 2.6 millions installed Chivo wallet (about 40% op population) and only 12% of them stayed it bitcoin after getting airdropped 30 dollars. So I guess the majority of Salvadorians can figure out how to install and use Chivo, they just don't want to and don't see a point of. Politicians really like to imitate some work: it is easy to say that all education needed is how to use chivo, it is easy to explain why they decided so, it is easy to show how much work they've done in that way and to say when where would be no result thay they've done all they could. I thought we are not talking about how to make politician's work easier but about how to solve a problem. As I see the problem Salvadorians know nothing about bitcoin and probably know not enough economy (40 found out how to install Chivo wallet already, they can explain others, it is not a big problem). To solve this problem education should be complex: you need launch a series of television shows explaining all the basics, add school and university courses, print comics with easy answers etc. It is not needed to educate each and other directly, giving enough knowledge to most educated would be enough as they'll explain others if they'll understand that themselves. If not to do that work (doesn't matter with which explanations, even if a lack of money and resources) there would be no result. And just about 12% of those who stayed in bitcoin after installing Chivo proves it.

The move by the country was quite preposterous shifting to completely new form of currency until it has reached a certain level of stability using it as main trade currency for the country apparently it was bad.

Bukele in this situation acts completely pragmatically from the point of view of a long-term investor, but it's one thing when you run a company and invest in bitcoin for a long time and another thing when you are in an elected position and there are no guarantees that you will not be re-elected for the next term and that then, how in this case the policy in our case of El Salvador will change, regarding bitcoin.

Saylor, for example, is already directly calling for getting rid of unregulated exchanges and is in favor of total regulation in the field of crypto finance, in order to expand the participation of government agencies in the crypto industry.

Your hypothetical is a wee bit unrealistic.  Yes.. people invest everything at the top and then whine because it did not work out, but that is not the base case.. but instead an outlier and/or should be considered as such.. or at least not any kind of best practice to work your finances in such a way that you seem to be suggesting as a  kind of base case scenario.

For example, let's say that in November 2021, a bitcoin newbie had an investment lump sum of $6k that they could dedicate towards bitcoin, and they had $1k per month of extra cash that they could put towards bitcoin.  Are you taking the position that they put all $7k into bitcoin at $69k and then just sat around for the past 7-8 months whining about how much money they lost including that they had another $6-7k come in (at $1k per month) that they could have put into bitcoin?

That sounds like a blind gambler to me.  I am not proclaiming that anyone who got into bitcoin in the last 1.5 years is not in the negative price territory.. but you leave a lot of presumptions regarding how dire the situation may well happen to be.. I do agree with your suggesting that this situation may show us that there may well have been a need to have had been measured in the way that any bitcoin newbies should have invested into bitcoin in the last year and a half.. The ones who are likely getting punished in current times are those who went balls to the walls and leveraged in various ways that were beyond their means to service such leveraging outside presuming that the bitcoin's price has to go up for them to be able to service their leveraged position.

Wherever the wealth of man is, there his life is. No matter how you will try to paint it, anyone that bought bitcoin at $69,000 will never be at ease at this time. In as much as we are aware that bitcoin will rebounce and still beat the ATH of $69k, it doesn't necessarily mean that we should enjoy our lives during adversity. No one knows if bitcoin will get to $2k dollars and no one knows how long it will take to appreciate again, that is why the rule to invest what you are able to lose still applies to bitcoin.

Anyone that has enough to take care of himself and his family should not be bothered much bitcoin bitcoin is compulsorily entering bull. But for those who came to multiply in order to have what to sustain the family with, my prayer goes to you all. You can bear the hard time now, but joy cometh in the morning.

I did not want to cite your whole post merely to save some space, even though I am responding to some overall themes that seem to run through your overall in your post, and I don't really disagree with any of the points that you are making except that I believe that it likely bares repeating that the vast majority of us seem to understand that there are no guarantees that the BTC price will ever go up ever again or to repeatedly experience new all time highs, but frequently we use language to suggest that there is a kind of guarantee or something close to a guarantee that the BTC price is going to go up... Even that segment that you cited from Bukele has a kind of implicit assertion that "for sure" or "immediately" the BTC price is going to go up in the future.

Perhaps humans just have tendencies to talk in variations of absolutes, and I do not really have any problem with that because we should be able to still understand some of the sentiments of nuance even when people around us are using absolute language to describe events in the future .. so maybe I am just quibbling, even though I see that so many times many of us choose language that kind of suggests that there are guarantees that the BTC price is going to continue to go up or reach all time highs and various inevitability UPpity scenarios like that... and don't get me wrong.. I am guilty of some of the same, too.. even though I try to be careful to make sure that I am not overly selling it and that my audience still understands that there are no guarantees and maybe that is why from time to time we need to repeat that there are no guarantees, even when we are using bullish language to talk about bitcoin and its ongoingly very strong investment thesis.

Don't get me wrong.  Bitcoin continues to serve as one of the strongest asset classes that the world has ever seen that is available on a kind of "anyone can invest" world-wide basis, which is likely contributing to its also serving as a kind of revolutionary vehicle that does not have to have violence contained within in order to facilitate the greatest wealth transfer that the world has ever seen for those who invest versus for those who lag in their investment or naysay in their investing into bitcoin.

So sure, there is a decent amount of value that price shows in terms of showing us how the battle is going .. the ups and the downs and the likely ongoing outrageous volatility that goes way beyond expectations in one direction and perhaps another.  One of the most likely things in bitcoin remains its ongoing short term volatility because wealth does not get transferred without some violent actions.. even if we are merely referring to various informational and financial manipulation tools that are employed along the way.

So in that regard there is a lot of utility in bitcoin no matter what the price, and surely some of the extreme downward pressures that we see in recent times is likely related to how extensively there has been various risky bets that have been taken on bitcoin think terms of relying upon its price continuing to go up or failing to go down below certain price points in the short term, and to some extent if the market actors (bear whales or whoever) can understand that those kinds of risky bets have been made, then they can achieve a lot of advantages to pushing the btc spot price down to those various breaking points and then to cause those risky betters to totally lose or get recked (in bitcoin parlance) because those actors (whether individuals, exchanges, interest-bearing product providers, miners, shitcoiners, etc) were presuming that UPpity (or at least specific bottom foundational locations - such as the 200-week moving average) was inevitable in bitcoin's short term.


Fair enough.

It still remains a quite ambiguous practice to use the term crypto so frequently that you had done in your earlier posts without specifying the relationship to bitcoin, and we have a lot of fucktwats out there who are spreading misinformation through some of their failing and refusing to use the term bitcoin in their various discussions and also implying that there is some kind of equally other coins and blah blah blah referring to ethereums crap and some of the scamcoins and smoke and mirror projects to imply that they are somehow similar or equivalent to bitcoin.  Lots of those folks are making bank on such misrepresentations or failure/refusal to be more clear in their language.. so we get all kinds of folks, including long term members in this forum parroting such vague language in their ways of talking about subject matters, even when we specifically seem to be talking about bitcoin (in a bitcoin-related thread).

I am not even opposed to talking about shitcoins or crypto or whatever as long as we can be somewhat clear about the terms and how it might be related to bitcoin if we happen to be in a bitcoin focused thread (like this one), and sure outside of this thread, if you are talking about shitcoins, then sure throw around vague-ass terms like crypto all that you want.. I don't tend to read a vast majority of that crap because I tend to NOT really understand what they are talking about half the time... unless they have some clarity in their discussion points.


Sure there are all kinds of ways that people are deficient in knowledge, and sometimes there could be some benefits to go into other areas, as you suggest, but sometimes that kind of higher level learning is not needed, so it will depend on context..

Let's say for example, there might be some governmental campaign efforts, that are aimed to teach people about how to use the Chivo wallet.  They have 1-2 people at 20 locations around the country for 8 hours a day.. Monday through Friday.. something like that for four weeks, and then they reassess after 4 weeks.  So, the workers might have a mandate to ONLY teach about Chivo wallet and nothing else, and maybe after 1 or 2 weeks into the campaign they learn that people are asking about some other related topics that are not in their mandate, they can choose whether to teach other additional topics or even choose new topics along the way.. change the number of locations or the number of teachers at each location.  

I don't see anything wrong with focused educational efforts that do not necessarily need to teach people all the ways that they do not know enough about the world and personal finances. it may or many not be in the government's interest to take on those kinds of extra projects.. Let's say after having 3 months of on-the-street educational campaigns, the government decides that 1-2 weeks needs to be added for all 16-year old high school students to learn about the Chivo wallet and some other bitcoin and other crypto concepts, or that six public colleges should add a course that involves teaching about bitcoin-related matters, and the courses will be funded by the government so long as they include x, y z and a, b and c topics and meet certain curriculum criteria that may or may not be flexible  depending on how the govt chooses to set up such guidance and/or whether to get involved in details or not.

There is no need to get all excited that everything needs to be taught to all people merely because a lot of normie plebs do not know, especially if the country (El Salvador) has a bitcoin focus, and they likely feel that they need to have some focus in terms of various aspects of their involvement including that they are leaving some educations efforts to private NGOs.. but at the same time, the government could still request data from NGOs or even create its own complementary or even competing services depending on how they measure the data on the ground and how it evolves over certain period s of time , whether over 3-6 months or even longer periods of time of measuring various aspects of data including but not limited to whether normie plebs know the difference between bitcoin and various broader financial matters and/or  the "dangers" of shitcoins or even if there is going to be any need for the government to get into those kinds of potential ly confusing topics or do they need to save normie plebs from shitcoins or not.. there can be some hands off in terms of shitcoins in terms of not really stopping normie plebs from getting involved in those various other projects, but sometimes governments might see an interest in whether their citizens are being scammed or mislead or even if governmental efforts in respect to bitcoin are being undermined by some of the shitcoin projects that might come into such a bitcoin-friendly space that has been provided/facilitated by the govt.  



I am not suggesting that there is any need to hide information.,, Focusing on bitcoin and proclaiming that shitcoins are mostly scams is not hiding information.. merely because you might have a different opinion about being more open to shitcoins.. I started out my responsive comments you to by asking what the fuck you are talking about in terms of the vague references to bitcoin and not using the word bitcoin in your description of what El Salvador is doing or what they should  do.. so I was not so much not that concerned if you might want to promote shitcoins in one way or another, but instead I wanted to get clarification about what you meant in the ways that you chose to frame the matters.

Let's say for example, the El Salvador government decides to conduct some public meetings in 10 cities/towns around the country, and the purpose of such public meetings is to talk about the Chivo wallet and some basics about bitcoin, and when they get to the meeting, there are some groups that want to ask questions about shitcoins, and the government reps can say shut the fuck up about shitcoins and those various off-topic matters, we are conducting these meetings with public resources with various specific purposes to talk about x, y and z related to the Chivo wallet, bitcoin basics and some other purposes.  Of course, they can be diplomatic in the way they might allow the raising of topics, but they also could choose to NOT open the topic beyond the ones that they choose at that particular time to promote.  

Of course, the government can choose various ways to design their public meetings including whether they are open to various topics or not or they can also just say that if those shitcoiners want to promote their shitcoins and the various shitcoin talking points, then they can carry out those kinds of activities in private ways..The government does not have to be open to all topics, but it does not mean that they are hiding anything by focusing on bitcoin.  You should well know that there is a difference between promoting something and being closed off to information.. or hiding information

You seem to have some difficulties if you believe that information is being hidden merely because it is not being promoted or even being an open talking point, which seems to be a misleading spin in which you are failing and refusing to appreciate the value of attempting to focus on bitcoin and  even to likely exclude som e of the nonsense about shitcoins or even to frame the shitcoins as nonsense while potentially even allowing those kinds of shitcoin projects to still take place (in other venues).. since they might not be illegal, yet... and yeah some of the shitcoin and bitcoin adjacent (that are not bitcoin) projects may well have some value and benefits, perhaps?  but that still does not mean that that such bitcoin adjacent ideas need to be open to discussion since they seem to be off-topic or irrelevant matters when there is a focus on bitcoin... which is not even close to the same as "being hidden."

I'm not going to answer each part of question as I guess I've got what you mean. First: I don't promote any other cryptocurrencies to become adopted in El Salvador. Next, what is Bitcoin: it is a specific cryptocurrency with specific functions and background. What is crypto in general, as idea: it is a class of such cryptocurrencies, of how do they work, of how to use them, of which risks are there.

So no, when I'm talking about what is happening with bitcoin in El Salvador I'm talking about bitcoin and I know that. But when I'm talking about education I'm talking about basic crypto knowledge and basic economy as I think that it is not enough to know just about bitcoin to use it wisely. It is not about learning about other cryptocurrencies, it is about learning basic ideas of the system, of idea, for which bitcoin is just a part, even if it is a main part.

I understand your point that you are worried about possible mess if some other cryptocurrencies would be promoted masquerading as education of crypto but teaching basics of crypto as an idea you'll IMO get the salvation of this problem. And hiding knowledge you'll get a mistrust.

His tweet represent what the people need to do at the bear market. We don't know how long it takes, it can happen within 2 years or above 3 years. The market can change any time. As per my understanding about the market there is chance of large scale bounce within two years time, because the halving falls in that time period. We can expect something good during those days prior/after halving.

That is what some people always fail to understand, the best time to buy or advocate for bitcoin is time like this when people are afraid to buy and wait for the next all-time-high. Salvadorans needs to know all these, you can check my later post about this. Some people will fail to buy and wait for like 2 years or 3 year and later after all-time-high, they will say the should have bought bitcoin at certain low price in the past.

Just like you meant, El Salvador is not going to do that. Thanks to their leader like their president, Nayib Bukele, minister of finance, Alejandro Zelaya and others that have learnt bitcoin price history and how bitcoin invest should be after losses (although no losses until they sell). They are there to help Salvadorans to know the true value of bitcoin and yet fiat remain accepted and working just like other countries that are bitcoin friendly, what people do not want to understand.

Your account was just created some days ago, probably you also start to know about bitcoin some days or weeks ago, you have a lot to learn before making conclusion.

---

I think Nayib Bukele is right about this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1538356901297143809?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw



It is a good advice, also a time for people that can hold for long like 2 or 3 years to buy bitcoin. I understand that price downturn can result to panic and uncertainty for new people but who buy at risky time like this when bitcoin has significantly decrease will not lose in long term.

I wonder how the price crash affects El Salvador, other than losing a lot of the fiat money that was invested into Bitcoin.

Huh?  You seem to be talking about something else.

El Salvador implemented a law that made bitcoin legal tender.

Yes, there are a variety of implementation questions, but those implementation questions are about bitcoin and bitcoin related matters.

When people use the term crypto, they are either just being vague in terms of not knowing how to employ the word bitcoin into their language, or they deceptively talking about something that is not bitcoin, such as shitcoins.

Let's not get into technicalities, just clear up your language jokers10 so we can attempt to understand if you are talking about bitcoin or some other topic..


What's your point?  lighting network (LN) is a way of transmitting, storing and facilitating various services on bitcoin.. sure it is a slightly different thing than bitcoin, but it is related to bitcoin, and a way to attempt to utilize bitcoin... in terms of not being bitcoin, who gives any ratts' asses about that?  You seem to be getting distracted if you are proclaiming that LN is not sufficiently bitcoin, so therefore you can vaguely refer to all kinds of other bullshit including but not limited to vague use of the term crypto.. as if it is some kind of an opening to speak in gobbledy gook.. and I have some difficulties why you are even trying to defend your use of the term.. .. can you at least try to clarify what you mean and put bitcoin in there and maybe repost what you were trying to say.. if you actually were trying to speak about bitcoin rather than just purposefully propagating confusion regarding what points you might have had, if any?

I don't really mean to be confrontational, but your choice to double down on seemingly meaningless mumbo-jumbo does not come off as really helpful in getting anywhere either...


Are you talking about bitcoin or what?  Maybe you can clarify?  It is not just about technically attempting to be a purist about word choice, but trying to figure out what are you talking about exactly? 

Sure there have been some criticisms that the El Salvador government did not make enough efforts to educate people about various aspects of their implementation of the bitcoin law, but a lot of those accusations are vague because there seems to be all kinds of activities around the fact that the bitcoin law has been implemented in the first place and even the fact that the law has provided a kind of space in which it becomes way easier to learn about bitcoin as a topic and also to actually apply it whether individually or various institutions or businesses. I doubt that there is any rush to force people to learn, so there is likely a lot of back and forth in terms of a lot of different efforts that sometimes might come through governmental actions and mandates and implementation measures, and the various ways that individuals and other non-governmental actors are taking actions too.

Again, maybe you can attempt to specify what it is that you are talking about and how it relates to what you envision to be happening in El Salvador in relation to bitcoin?  Yeah, of course there is the Chivo wallet and there are other wallets too, and we have seen some various posts about some of the data related to expanded usage of various bitcoin related systems in El Salvador, but we have also seen reports and claims that there might be some concerns that adoption is happening too slow or that the population is overly confused about what is bitcoin, and even you suggested that these matters take time.. but you did not use the word bitcoin so it became a bit more difficult trying to figure out what you might have been contemplating to be going on in El Salvador or what they were doing there back to your choice to ongoingly use of such vague term such as crypto.


Why not use the term bitcoin then, if that is what you were talking about?  It does not make you appear smarter or more academic or detached to use a vague term such as crypto if you are really talking about bitcoin.   Do you have some other reason to not use the term bitcoin so we know that's what you meant?


I already responded to the idea that there might be times in which some clarification might be needed in regards to bitcoin as compared with shitcoins or that some wallets might have shitcoin features, but I still doubt that learning about various shitcoins would be central to whatever the Salvadorean government is trying to achieve or any of the non-governmental organizations that are focused on various aspects of helping to educate Salvadorean people regarding El Salvador's bitcoin law implementation.  It could be in some sense that we might be quibbling, about how any particular education campaign might be framed or the kinds of subjects that might come up and choices that individuals might take in terms of how to present various bitcoin-related topics in El Salvador, but I still doubt any characterization that they have goals to teach about "crypto" in El Salvador or that it is even a good way of trying to describe what has already happened in El Salvador, what the state on the ground in El Salvador is right now and/or what they are trying to do in El Salvador to work towards their bitcoin adoption future. 

At the risk of repeating myself too much, yeah of course, shitcoins are in El Salvador and striving to get their little scams into El Salvador, but El Salvador specifically choose to write their law in a way that is bitcoin specific, and shitcoins are different than bitcoin in a lot of ways.. bringing us back to the question about why use the word "crypto" when trying to describe what is happening in El Salvador related to bitcoin.. back to you jokers10?


Huh?

There's nothing wrong for the El Salvadorean government and or related entities to continue to press forward with their bitcoin information and various aspect of their bitcoin implementation.  Frequently, a lot of work can get done during times in which BTC prices are suppressed.  Of course, current spot price and ongoing dynamics related to BTC spot price is not comfortable for everyone, but I doubt that there is any need to just shut it off, wind it down or whatever other depression-based approach you are suggesting to be the better way forward.  Maybe we should just recommend that the El Salvadorean government just shut the whole thing down, like the IMF suggested that they do.. ?  The IMF is correct, right?  El Salvador should have never gotten involved in such a wild and crazy idea like bitcoin, right? That's the better way to go forward?

This is not the best time for Bitcoin advocacy in and around El Salvador, as the Bitcoin adoption has been viewed as a bad idea by some segments of El Salvadorans because of its volatile nature, and seeing the present Bitcoin price conditions make it hard to b advocate for Bitcoin retail adoption. But before now we all saw how the whole internet and the Bitcoin community was engorged with El Salvador Bitcoin sermons not until the market took a downturn at the beginning of the year 2022.

Not really of the assests, but rather of the value of those assets, measured in counter-valued fiat terms … but only on the books to date, since they are unrealized losses until they actually sell their BTCs.

That doesn’t mean that the situation is not worrying at some level for them, not only from the perception perspective, but also from the bookkeeping point of view. The bitcoins owned by the government allegedly came from the initial 150M $ bitcoin Trust established to give liquidity to the Chivo System. I say allegedly because, if my memory serves me well, the initial statements pointed in this fashion, but there is no explicit mention to all subsequent purchases. Even so, the Trust likely has some bookkeeping rules to comply with, and standing at a loss of say those mentioned 40M $, even if only on the paper, may trigger some inner problems at some point in time.