Topic: How Satoshi Nakamoto Fooled the World - page 14. (Read 8983 times)

You all talk of this bitcoin like it is some kind of a god. Here's the news: bitcoin is unit in a scheme. Scheme is some kind of a plan. I can make a plan that you will give me your car, and after that I'll just say to you: "you have 10 units in my plan". Or write that down. And that would mean exactly what? Well it would mean I am planning to fool you. So, the fact that Nakamoto's software writes down that you have units in their plan, simply means that you've been fooled. So, stop viewing bitcoin as a god.

OP's motives are probably that he is some type of authoritarian - fascist, socialist, communist, despot etc - at heart and doesn't like people being free to protect themselves and their assets from him and his ilk.

Currently bitcoin is trusted by the big whale with the news you share will not change anything, now bitcoin has been legalized in the country that is elsavador so if there is fud news maybe bitcoin will only go down temporarily and will rise again over time just need patience to hold bitcoin and You will be a successful person in the future.

This thread is crazy and I still that know why op will have to drop this here. Is there anyone that is interested in arguing with this thread when op is not the actually the original authur of this post. Any person can choose to write whatsoever they like and that is welcome. Bitcoin is an asset in as much as it is making person make wealth. Everything is timing and nothing more. Bitcoin is down now and will soon go bullish letter just like the price had been fluctuating.

What the heck? How such thread has like 30 pages? I think the OP is actually getting what he was asking for... Attention. Come on peeps... Ignore these kind of posts and let him be alone in his little world.

I have to admit that the original post is actually one of the best rhetoric twisted narratives I have ever seen. This looks like "Pudding" (my alias for Putin) trying to make us believe that a mall is actually an ammo depot or that a paediatric hospital was a command center or another ammo depot!

This guy must have learn from Pudding because despite the fact the Pudding was in FSB and is supposedly very good at lying and deceiving, they are both terrible with their narratives! And I end up also contributing. lol
What a mess!

Translation: "I am out because you don't buy false advertising. But before I leave I'll insult you with a couple ad hominems."

K im out. You obviously have some sort of cognitive dissonance to work on first, before you can understand more challenging things.

A scammer is the one who uses false information or advertising in order to achieve financial gain. People who have units in the bitcoin ponzi must use such falsehoods in order to get rid of their worthless units. You're sort of a scammer. You're spreading false information online and making false statements. But fortunately(for you), you're not a public figure and the reach of your falsehoods is not significant enough for you to make financial gains. But people like Elon Musk are a completely different story. One of the criminal charges in the case against Bernie Madoff was concerned with "false statements". Musk made a lot of false statements, such as that crypto is money, and achieved financial gains because of that. When the bitcoin ponzi collapses there will be a lot of unhappy people pressuring the politicians to deliver justice. And then, people like Musk could be the target.

How? You can’t even separate between someone who is discussing with arguments, and someone who wants to scam you out of your money. Idc what you invest in, or how you handle your money, you should decide it yourself anyways. You assume everyone who doesn’t fit your own reasoning is a scammer, which makes you incapable of intellectual debate. This world is too complex to understand for you, so you gotta assume everyone is nefarious, to not get overwhelmed, a big sign of weakness. It’s just laughable, when people that are way older than the younger generation, aren’t even capable to engage in debate, when they’re supposed to be the ones who teach us.

Like i said its not an economic resource, just stop trying. The lack of fungibility is a real problem, wanna see it in action?
Here:
https://www.emk.com/en-us/gold/#navigation:q=&attrib%5Bcat_url%5D%5B0%5D=%2Fgold&order=shopsort+desc&first=0

Which one of these would you accept over another? Which one do you choose to best store your money? The answer will always be an subjective decision, but if we wanna enable universal trade this becomes a problem. This problem doesn’t exist with Bitcoin, because each unit is the same. Im not using abstract semantics, this actually relates to the real world. It actually influences how well something can be used as money, not everyone will want your jewellery, not everyone will want ur gold coin the same, because there’s too many differences. The same problem exists in fiat, who will accept your yen, who will accept your euros, who will accept a 500€ bill? The desirability varies if fungibility isnt good enough.

I don’t even want you to invest in it, even if you start to understand it. Im discussing with you because you’re working with wrong assumptions and bending concepts to fit ur needs, instead of staying objective. Scepticism towards something new, against any rational argument is a repeating pattern in society, people are just too hesitant to leave their conformity bubbles.

You're using semantics to try to find justification for bitcoin ponzi. Yes we can say that money is not an economic resource. Money is a word that we use to describe the concept that some economic resources have specific characteristics, such as fungibility. Because of that, we say that an economic resource is money. So if there are no economic resources to begin with, you cannot use the word money. Except if you want to scam people. Which is exactly what happens here. A unit in a scheme that has no economic resources is called money, or specifically, "revolutionary new money", in order to scam people out of their resources. Hence, a classical scam dressed up in a new uniform.

Because it wouldn’t be.

Because money is not an economic resource and not supposed to be an productive asset. Your gold that gets used on computers or as jewellery becomes useless as money. Gold holders will never convert their gold into anything different, they will even make sure no bare hand touches their bar or coin, because it hurts the fungibility of it. You can’t just use it for various things and then sell it as before, this is a myth beginners don’t get.

But there’s different reasons for it, someone who buys gold bars or coins doesn’t think about, if it satisfies different needs they won’t be using it for. They will use a similar evaluation model that i outlined above, its completely different from jewellery buyers or makers. Gold isn’t valuable, because it’s used for different things. Different things use gold, because it’s valuable.

I think you’re almost there to understand Bitcoin, if you can start to separate between money and economic resources. In economics a clear distinction between the two is made, and money is explicitly excluded to be counted as an economic resource. If you get this concept we’re there and it will make sense to you.

Money is what allows the trade of economic resources without doing barter(more efficient). It is not an economic resource itself and it’s not its job to become a product, it should just allow us to trade more efficiently. Some forms of money can be used as an productive asset, but then loose their purpose in return(it’s not money anymore then, or becomes a worse form of money).

Bitcoin is just the purest form of money there is at the moment, and so it might seem weird that it can’t be used for anything else, but exactly this is what money is supposed to be. It’s cool that gold can be used for many things, but it hurts its monetary properties when used for something else.

You refuted nothing. You just said that my definition wouldn't be accepted.

I don't want to talk about intrinsic value. I just stated the fact that after the bitcoin purchase, no intrinsic value exists to be consumed in order for people to satisfy their needs. There's nothing to discuss here.

Irrelevant. The very reason gold is traded is because of its unique characteristics that are able to satisfy various human needs. Speculative buying doesn't change that fact. Gold still has intrinsic value that can be consumed by humans. This intrinsic value is what is stored in gold and traded.

Yes, fungibility is important for money, that is, for economic resources. But bitcoin is not an economic resource. It's a unit in a system that has zero economic resources. Thus, bitcoin is not money and fungibility doesn't apply to it.

There's one problem with all this. There's no economic resource in the bitcoin system, so there's nothing to confiscate, counterfeit or put in trust. Meaning, people are just transferring the info on how many units in the scheme with zero economic resources they have. This is like having a losing lottery ticket, have 21 million ownership stakes in that ticket and all that people do is transferring and storing the info about how many stakes someone has or has had. There's nothing to confiscate, counterfeit or put in trust here, given that the ticket is a losing one and grants access to nothing. So, why would you spend time and energy on transferring and storing info on these stakes? It's a complete nonsense. That's the essence of the whole bitcoin system. It's the dumbest thing ever created. People are spending enormous amounts of energy only to store and transfer the info on how many stakes in nothing they have or had.
Irrelevant. Debt is an economic resource because it benefits people at settlement. The quality of debt is a completely different question that has nothing to do with this topic.

Money is just a name for specific types of economic resources. Unit(BTC) in a system that has zero economic resources cannot be money by definition because there nothing to compare with the resources that you give up in a trade. So, BTC is not money. It's a ponzi unit, given that all ponzies have zero economic resources for people to benefit, and they can benefit only from resources contributed by new investors.

Maybe we can all remember this quote and end this nightmare of a thread:

I refuted the definition, because you weren’t articulating yourself clearly, you didn’t even mention the word intrinsic value once till now(intrinsic value ≠ value). And nah i didnt fantasise about anything, this definition is still bad af for more serious use cases, even if you wanna use it for intrinsic value, but i won’t discuss this now, because it doesn’t matter.

If you wanna talk about intrinsic value, then it’s a different discussion. But finally you’re starting to articulate yourself more clearly, we can call this progress.

The problem is you’re trying to suggest something with this. Sure there’s forms of money like gold than can be used to produce goods. But for people who used gold as money, this is not the primary function.

Also like i said above, fungibility is important for any kind of money, small differences can already affect its desirability. So maybe it’s better in the first place, to not be able to make different things out of it, because amateurs won’t understand it and then shoot themselves in the foot. This is also be a point that could be made against nfts and tokens on a main layer.

Are we starting to evaluate the capability of footballers, by evaluating how well they can play basketball now too?

K let’s remember the state of the world in the last years, now let’s check out what Bitcoin did:

• Uniting a group of anti authoritarians worldwide(which is hard, because they’re usually individualists and completely different from each other).
• Challenging people to get deeper into computer science, economics, game theory and psychology.
• No need to trust a central authority.
• Self custody over money.
• Censorship resistance.
• Transaction finality.
• Sane monetary policy that won’t change in our lifetime.
• Hardest asset to confiscate.
• Tearing down economic gatekeeping(you can transact worldwide, or borderlessly recover your money, if you can remember 12/24 words(optionally a passphrase on top) or keep them safe).
• No need for permissions.
• Best long term perfoming asset in the last decade.
• Triggering morally bankrupt and emotional people.

The list goes on.

Im sure no human can get a benefit out of this, because making jewelry out of money is more important for the world right now.

There’s an argument to be made, about how debt based money creation affects its durability. Because with each time you’re taking or giving a loan, you’re essentially making everyone else’s purchasing power go lower, on the big scale this is huge.

How durable is it to gain some additional economic capabilities individually in the short term, but then making the entire working population fall into the cantillon effect(more and more extreme concentration of wealth at the top).

So repeated use of Fiat actually affects it’s durability to be used as a store value, no matter how someone will phrase it, which makes it a weak form of money long term.
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

And now to put it simply, stop mixing economic resources and money, because it will do you more harm than good and just create confusion to yourself. In most cases money isn’t supposed to be used as an economic resource(to produce goods or services). It should facilitate trade, but not be an productive resource itself. The purest form of money isn’t to be used for anything else, like i outlined above, using money for different things can be counterproductive.

Here's the link

https://plagiarismdetector.net/

Yes, it's free, and no, it not always shows 100% unique, like Hamza2424 said.

Here's an example



I just copied and pasted an extract from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin.


Isn't a rocket science, and, yeah, one can find that info in many places, but what I meant was the simplicity of your explanation. There's a popular saying among scientists: "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." You've passed the test.

You cannot refute a definition by fantasizing that someone would not accept it. That's just presenting how powerless you are in a discussion.

And you're powerless because I am right. Bitcoin is not an economic resource and no human being can benefit from it. Products with intrinsic value are  economic resources because humans can consume that intrinsic value to satisfy their needs. Debt behind fiat money is an economic resource because people benefit when that debt is paid, as I have explained in the OP. Capital is an economic resources because in itself it is intrinsic value or it can be used to create products with intrinsic value. Intrinsic value is, as said before, used to satisfy human needs and in that way it benefits people.

There's no intrinsic value to consume after you buy bitcoin.  Also, you own no debt or capital after the purchase. Everyone who has ever bought bitcoins essentially bought the units in a system that has zero economic resources. That's why people must dump that system's worthless units to someone else. Which is essentially how all ponzi schemes operate. The bitcoin system is a ponzi scheme falsely publicly advertised as a payment system. And bitcoin is a unit in that ponzi scheme falsely advertised as money. Money is an economic resource, and not a unit in a scheme where people need resources of new investors to be able to benefit. The false advertising is how new victims are lured into the scheme. You're one of the victims of false advertising and you're using the same advertising to save yourself from the scheme, or to exist it with as much economic resources as possible.

This definition is wrong tho and wouldn’t be accepted anywhere. You can use it for yourself it’s fine, but in a debate it’s ridiculous. If you’re so sure about it, then go ahead and write an academic paper about it and see it being eaten alive by peer review.

You’ll see more people here engage in critical thinking and constructive discussion(even with idiots) than in most places. And also the whitepaper wasn’t released here, but nice try.

Again im telling you, if you work as an analyst in a company, or in academia(in places that still do science), people won’t be as nice to y’all as here, if y’all produce bs like this.

Then you’re also mixing religion with a software whitepaper, which:

1. Is ridiculous.

2. Just shows you can’t compete with actual arguments.

3. Did you ever see someone claim it is their bible? I don’t think so, you’re just letting ur personal bias influence your judgment.

Everything i showed there is it’s own thing and coexists with each other. I even included Greshams law which takes this into account, if you’re too lazy to study then i cant help you. Also i compared the individual properties of gold, fiat and bitcoin with each other, a table won’t change what i wrote, but if you’re too lazy to read i cant help you. I didn’t say anything without an explanation behind it.

If you think anything in the comparison is wrong then point out what and we can discuss it. Otherwise it seems like you just don’t want to accept it, because it doesn’t fit your personal bias.

I didn’t hear you say something intellectual yet and if you tried to refute something you failed hard.

I kinda know that. But for me it's simply an intellectual challenge to engage in refuting of their myths and legends. And I think that they genuinely believe that their scam or ponzi units are money, so I have to educate them that money is an economic resource and not a unit in a scheme where economic resources must be brought from the outside of the scheme in order for people to return their investment of economic resources.

What's the point of checking bitcoin on a scam? I don't think it makes any sense, just a waste of time. For many of us have already made sure more than once that it is rather difficult to name bitcoin as a race.

i will disagree with you because can not say thing like that and if you want to convince us that bitcoin is better than fiat currency you can put them mostly the differences in a tabular form  some that people will know why you said bitcoin is better than fiat currency, what i need is point and i can agree with you, but for now fiat is on it own and bitcoin is for it own the comparison will much and the similarity will be same