Topic: How Satoshi Nakamoto Fooled the World - page 19. (Read 8983 times)

Sure exponential s-curve adoption based on Metcalfe's law and networking principles has been part of what tadamichi and I had been talking about, but it was not the only thing, because when you are an individual attempting to decide what you are going to do in terms of whether to invest  into bitcoin and how much to invest, you may or may not be able to recognize or appreciate that exponential s-curve adoption exists where you might be on the timeline or even abilities to figure out your own financial and/or psychological circumstances.  

Even though you (arcmetal) acknowledge that there are ups and downs within the s-curve.. we still should acknowledge that those squiggly exponential lines are not guaranteed in terms of either how far they will go UPpity or how long it will take for the BTC price associated with the squigglies to get to whatever point that they are getting (and sure you acknowledged that part too).  Lot's of normies (or bitcoin newbies) may well end up getting reckt as fuck, if they are not able to figure out some kind of reasonable and prudent strategy that fits for them, which many of us would theorize that kind of reckening to be difficult to achieve, even though we likely have witnessed some folks who end up achieving what seems to be an impossible task (getting reckt in a bull asset class like bitcoin).. and sure one of the fastest ways to get reckt is to use margin or leverage, but another way is merely trying to time the ups and downs of the market with a kind of hubris belief of knowing where the BTC price is going in the short-to-medium term.. which also may well end up causing both financial and/or psychological damages.

What you guys are describing is just the S-curve of adoption.  This is something that holds true for any new technology.  Think of: electricity distribution, the light bulb, TV, the internet, cell phones, etc.  They all went through the S-curve of adoption: at the introduction of a new technology very few will have it, or use it, but as time passes and if the technology is useful more people will have it and utilize it.

But in the case of bitcoin it so happens that in the beginnings of its S-curve, it has a low price and then later in its S-curve it has a high price.  Which is simply due to supply and demand.  This allows for some who notice this to get in on an easy way to grow an investment.  But, as you point out, towards the end of its S-curve, when bitcoin has spread as far as it can spread, its price will level out.  A point will be reached where buyers and sellers are in a sort of balance.  The price will still oscillate, but the large incremental rise over time will no longer exist.  Of course, no one really knows when or at what price this will happen, at a million, at ten million, this is not possible to predict.

I guess its just cool to see that others have noticed these obvious (maybe not so obvious to some, I'm looking at you Snowshow) properties of bitcoin.

For sure, it is really difficult to figure out how to invest these days, and sure anyone who might have already accumulated decent wealth might end up presuming that they can take chances that their existing investment portfolio will hold value through their remaining years.. if they expect to get 5-10 years out of it or maybe the uncertainty of longevity approaching 30 years - even people in their 60s tend to want to consider that they might live into their 90s - even though they might not end up having more than 10 years of life left in them.. but even being able to enjoy wealth can become difficult for folks who are aging into their 60s and beyond - some folks are more lucky than others, but even young folks sometimes will consider that they might be able to have more energy (and physical fitness into their elder years than ends up being the case), and I would not even suggest not having that kind of hope and having somewhat of a retirement nestegg just in case there might end up being an ability to enjoy and draw upon it into the 90s.

I have invested since I first entered into young adult life, and of course, the kinds of investments that were available for me, were different than what is currently available, but still similar trade-offs are still going to exist in terms of how far into the future that any of us strive to consider our investment, so when we are younger, we tend to be more preoccupied with wanting to get a quick pay off, and surely some of those kinds of inclinations can still carry into our practices as we get older, if we have not learned how to get them under control.  So many younger folks get fucked because they get impatient with their desires to get rich quick and to see a quick payoff, and even if 4-10 years might seem as if it is too far into the future, it should be a timeline that any age investor should be able to attempt to build bitcoin into their investment timeline in order that they can at least shoot for initially investing with that kind of a timeline in mind, and even if they can assess their investment along the way, it may well become way more meaningful to defer any kinds of serious reassessment until sometime within the 4-10 year window in order to figure out how well their wealth has grown (or not) in terms of accumulating BTC during that time period.
 
Of course, each of us has discretion to manage our investment portfolio however we like, and so if we might end up focusing on ways to accumulate BTC in the first 4-10 years of our investment, then we are likely to be in a better position to engage in better assessment once we have given our BTC holdings time to accumulate and potentially compound upon itself.  

For sure, not everyone is in the same boat, and there will be some folks who are already older, so they might be able to be more aggressive in their allocation of value into BTC, and there are going to also be folks who might not be able to have 4-10 years as an investment timeline because they are already getting elderly and are worried about locking up too much of their value into something like BTC.  For the folks with a potentially shorter timeline, the answer should NOT be NOT to invest as Snowshow seems to want to argue, but instead to perhaps tailor the investment amount to a smaller allocation, so if a younger or middle aged person might be able to reasonably figure out an allocation into BTC  that is anywhere between 1% and 25%, the person with the shorter timeline may well want to consider an allocation into BTC that is towards the lower part of the range - something like 1% to 5% and of course tailored to personal circumstances.

Younger folks and those ones with hardly any resources (maybe from a developed country and might not even be able to allocate $10 per week) may well just have to figure out their own circumstance in terms of trying to figure out how much is reasonable for them to invest into BTC, and surely if they continue to invest into BTC with even low amounts of value, there might be ways that through the years - even perhaps shorter than a 4-10 year time horizon, they will be able to increase their allocation into BTC based on being able to either increase their income or to cut some of their expenses.

So, even though in my last post I was suggesting that there could be longer term considerations (that go out 30 years or more concerning where bitcoin might be at that time) that bitcoin is likely to absorb more and more of the monetized assets in the world because it remains the best of sound monies/assets, but it also has the better of the monetary qualities that were already mentioned regarding verifiability, portability, divisibility, ability to individually hold and other aspects. Individuals are still likely going to be attempting to invest on shorter timelines that are hopefully at least 4-10 years or more while at the same time having an ability to appreciate where BTC as a competitive asset is going and is likely to continue to go - absent some kind of crazy-ass outrageous event.. like the world blowing up.. and then we are all fucked anyhow, so why get all worked up about some kind of an event like that.. we need to attempt to prepare for more likely scenarios rather than world blowing up scenarios that would end up causing us not to prepare at all.


You are a disingenuine twat.  

You should not be changing the OP in any kinds of meaningful way(s) once you established it..

Sure a little tweaking of the OP would be fine, but you changed the OP a couple of times already - which shows that you do not know what the fuck your point was or what it is or what it might be,


.......and also that you are not even trying to work through whatever issue that you had presented in the first place... because you "come up with something new" blah blah blah..

 

no wonder no one likes you, you do not have any friends and you have not even got an invitation to the prom...


you  fuck




 

Read the OP. I edited it just for you.

I've always wondered about this kind of thinking. From your point of view, money is also pieces of paper. Why do you then believe that they are worth anything?

For sure, there is a lot of speculation regarding how much bitcoin is designed to pump forever.. both in terms of value continuing to flow into it (Gresham's law principles) and the fact that other assets are still going to exist and there will likely still be some monetary attributions that are contained within various other assets, too...

From what we can see now, bitcoin is likely to remain as the most sound of the monetary assets - absent some other more sound money product coming around.. which surely is possible.. but hard to presume facts that are currently not in evidence, and there currently do not seem to be any assets in existence that competes with bitcoin in terms of being able to serve as both a storage of value and a currency in terms of bitcoin having the best of currency characteristics too.. at least in terms of verifiability, portability, divisibility and ease of being able to personally custody it (if desired).

For sure, many of the current bitcoin HODLers might ONLY have an investment timeline of 4-30 years (accounting for mortality), so even if there are people who attempt to design and predict for the future, there can still be mixed sentiments regarding personal allocations into bitcoin in order to prepare so far into the future, and even if some members plan to attempt to leave legacies in terms of their bitcoin, they still might be struck with some dilemmas regarding how to pass down such legacies and the extent to which they might have to make sure that they have persons who can manage their bitcoin wealth.. which also could be laden with uncertainties too far into the future.

I guess that part of my point remains that shorter term time horizons still remain more important to current BTC HODLers, even if we anticipate that bitcoin remains open to new entrants too.. since we still ONLY have such low levels of adoption.. so there are likely to continue to be usability changes that could affect the ways that BTC HODLers think about the value of what they are holding and if they might need to make adjustments to their BTC allocations.. based on their own personal circumstances that do not necessarily go into generational wealth kinds of considerations... because so many new entrance into the bitcoin space continue to build their bitcoin positions in the coming years.. which well could take us into a dynamic of growth, adoption and building of systems around bitcoin that is lasting 20-30 years or more into the future.

I completely agree with you Jay. My point of view was more of a long term outlook, in the case that Bitcoin becomes so dominant that hodling alone won’t bring gains anymore. Then i think the incentives change and it will be used as a currency. But we’re still far away from this point. I just brought this up, because it kinda defeats the ponzi narrative, if Bitcoin really was a ponzi, then why does it stop bringing gains once it’s used everywhere and you wouldn’t even need to convert it into other currencies. But it’s a win/win situation for us hodlers, because it serves us like a stock or safe haven, as long as the old broken system continues and in case Bitcoin wins we get an ultra sound money system and early investors got rewarded for making it happen(because they have stacked the most sats).

Hahahaha... you are a funny guy. A system that gives you shares in nothing, which is why you're forced to dump them on someone else is better than systems that give you shares in something. Are you drunk or what?

I don't really disagree with your overall points tadamichi, yet I am a little bit bothered if we end up locking ourselves too much into assertions that bitcoin is like a currency and not like a stock.. because in several ways, based on bitcoin's unique design aspects, bitcoin is like a lot of asset classes all at once.  So, in that regard, bitcoin can be used like a currency, but there is already quite a bit of reluctance for bitcoin HODLers to use bitcoin like a currency in part based on the fact that it is the most sound of monies that the world has ever seen... so many people are going to become way more reluctant to spend it, when they may well have access to a lot of other monies that are less valuable and they can spend those less valuable monies (even assets) first.

So in some sense, there seems to be a kind of current built-in incentive status, that bitcoin HODLers are less likely to spend their bitcoin until after such a point that they either run out of the other kinds of monies/assets or they are so damned overly allocated in bitcoin that they have no disincentive to spend it because they have too much of it anyhow. It can take a while for bitcoin HODLers to get to the point in which they feel that they are overly allocated in bitcoin, especially if they are receiving cashflow/value from other kinds of asset classes/currencies - so they may well be inclined to spend those lower value assets./currencies first.

Personally, I don't have any real issues comparing bitcoin to stocks, even though it will tend towards a lot of misunderstandings if there are too many attempts to pigeonhole bitcoin into such a category - because in essence all stocks have a considerable amount of centralization, and so it could end up being way too misleading to be presuming bitcoin to be similar in those kinds of ways that HODLers/developers/miners have some kinds of control over bitcoin's issuance - and they do not.. it's almost as if Snowshow is wanting to imply that bitcoin has proof of stake attributions (similar to stocks) when it does not, so in that regard I agree with you tadamichi that getting too caught up in stock analogies will lead people to NOT understand the attributions of bitcoin very well.

The same „loan business“ that allows private institutions to create money out of nowhere and thus devalues your shares automatically over time, without most of the population realizing or understanding what is happening.

So we have the choice between a system(fiat) that makes us poorer automatically. If you store your worth in fiat you will get poorer by default, so you already lost the game before playing it. The only choice this system gives you to prevent this, is to escape fiat into other assets(like stocks), but not everyone has the ability to do so. So if the only way to survive this system is to leave it, why should any sane person want this(except if they wanna be a masochist or are close to the money printer).

Then the other choice is a system(Bitcoin) that tries to stop this madness and actually gives you the ability to stay in it, without getting rekt. But sure Bitcoin is the worthless scam.

You know yourself that your logic is flawed and it doesn’t make sense to keep discussing it, if you refuse to accept basics. If one day you actually wanna understand why Bitcoin is like it is, we’re happy to help you and if not it’s fine too.

Dollar is a share in the US dollar system that has loan business behind it and returns the investments to dollar holders from that business. So, people are not dumping dollars, but exchanging shares in the loan business. You dump shares in investment scams because there's no business activity behind those scams from which the holders of these shares could return their investments. So, you can call bitcoin a currency or whatever, but bitcoin system is still a scam system and bitcoin is stil a completely worthless share in that scam system.

No need for examples. The fact is that when you invest in the bitcoin system and get the record of your investment that shows how many shares(BTCs) in this system you hold, the system will never return even a dime worth of your investment. Which is why you're forced to dump your worthless shares to new investors. These new ones must also dump them. And so on. When there's no one left to dump them on, the whole system collapses. And that's literally how all investment scams operate. The bitcoin system is just a scheme for dumping the worthless shares from one investors to another and recording how many shares a particular investor has or has had.

If you have the audacity to judge what is a „scam“ and what not(while having 0 knowledge of it), then go ahead and give us examples of things that aren’t scams compared to Bitcoin. Im waiting, but i already know you can’t.

You don't get it, do you? Whatever you say about bitcoin it won't change the fact that people cannot get anything from the bitcoin system when holding the record of how many shares in this system they have. People invested in this system, got the records or evidences of their investments, and then they are able to return their investments only if new investors buy their records. The system returns them nothing, it is completely worthless. That what you call bitcoin is just the name for one share in that worthless system. Just like one share in the US dollar system is called a dollar. When people invested in the US dollar system and consequently hold dollars as evidence of their investments (shares in the system), it is this system that returns them their investments. Either through goods, services or labor of the borrowers or their collaterals if they default on their loans. The bitcoin system is a scam that lures people to invest, and then leaves them with nothing, which is why they are forced to wait for new investors like in all investment scams.. Your writing is just marketing for the bitcoin scam. People are not transferring value through the bitcoin system. That's a lie of the bitcoin marketing. They are transferring records of how many shares in the worthless bitcoin system they have. Stop spreading lies and disinformation.

If a member here:

1) describes bitcoin's already existing price performance, then that would largely be an attempt to accurately describe history (or at least I would hope that the description would be attempted be accurate).

or

2) attempts to describe where the BTC price is at, and where s/he expects the BTC price to go that is an attempt to predict the future which should be based on probabilities rather than anything that is certain  - even though some factual outcomes are more probable than other outcomes.

Neither of those are lies if they either do not represent facts and attempt to fairly represent probabilities.

Bitcoin continues to serve as one of the best and greatest asymmetrical bets to the upside because it is widely available to vast swaths of society and there are still quite good odds for BTC price performance to play out positively both in terms of multiples of times current value/price and magnitudes of times current value/price.

Of course, we should be able to recognize and appreciate that on the shorter time horizons such as months to a few years, bitcoin's price has fluctuated quite greatly; however, historically it also appears that the longer that anyone has been in bitcoin, any investment that they have made has been able to compound upon itself so long at any investment strategy errored upon attempting to stay invested (aka HODL) and perhaps to continue to accumulate BTC.

Even though quite a bit of fear mongering continues to exist in the world, there is no real strong evidence showing that bitcoin's future is not likely to continue to be positive in ways similar to its history - even if the degree of the price/value increases are probably not going to be as exponential as they had been historically, merely because bitcoin's market cap is higher.. so a current market cap of $600 billion-ish might have a maxing out value around $1 quadrillion (which would be ONLY around 1,666x more upside).. and it could take a hell of a long time to get from here to there.. perhaps more than 100 years.. 

So we could have a lot of UPs and DOWNs along the way.. and not even guaranteeing that any 4-year period will be profitable - even though historically, so far, BTC prices have always been profitable on any 4-year timeline, but even though bitcoin is likely to continue to go up, there could be some periods of time that last 4 years or more in which the BTC price has not gone to new ATHs during that timeline.

We cannot ignore downside scenarios of bitcoin even going to zero or somewhere close to zero, but the Lindy effect does establish more and more confidence that the longer that bitcoin exists (tick tock next block every 10 minutes not failing) the more likely it is going to continue to exist and continue to build and to continue to serve as a powerful force, and bitcoin seems to already be there, including quite strong ongoing likelihoods of continuing to grow rather than shrinking in value... especially if we zoom out and consider timelines that are at least 4-10 years or more into the future.


You may be correct Snowshow, that revolution might not be an exactly accurate word choice; however it seems to me that we are in the early stages of what seems to the largest transfer of wealth in the history of man, facilitated by bitcoin.  There likely will be some violence along the way, but there does not have to be violence along the way... The defenders of the status quo powers that be, financial institutions and governments who believe that they might be able to stifle bitcoin through violence may well end up deploying some of those kinds of resources and tactics - but it can become difficult to war against bitcoin in terms of traditional mechanisms and could merely end up causing a lot of folks to just be more secretive with their BTC holdings - especially if they believe that they might end up getting targeted by no coiners and low coiners who failed/refused to prepare for the ongoing wealth transfer that is taking place under their noses.. when it seems that they can join in on the bitcoin system at any time that they want, but instead some of them will continue to believe that they can defend their wealth through traditional coercive means, such as violence.   None of us can really know how long the wealth transfer is going to take or to know how quickly some of the no coiners and low coiners are going to jump on board and show that they were precoiners all along... some of them are likely to be so stubborn that they are going to die as no coiners/low coiners, so if they have wealth that is transferred to their heirs, the heirs can choose not to suffer in the same kinds of negative ways as their stubborn predecessors.

So on an individual level, many folks should realize that they are best off to jump on the bitcoin train sooner rather than later.. but the choice remains in their hands because bitcoin is not coercive in traditional senses... .but only provides incentive mechanisms for people to join.. such as NGU technology.

I am still not sure whether you truly don't understand or if you are just pretending. Bitcoin is not a system of "shares" like in traditional stock markets. Why do you keep comparing them?
To put it simply, Bitcoin is merely a method of transferring value between two parties. P2P type of payment system. There is no issuer of shares or company in which you invested funds when you exchange fiat currency for cryptocurrency. You simply exchanged one currency for another while, at the same time, someone else did the same in the opposite direction. That is it!

All systems use numbers to express the quantity of shares in a system that someone bought. But in the bitcoin system these shares are worthless because their holders are unable to return their investments from the system that issued them.

Cringe.
Hate to break it to you, but the banking system just uses imaginary numbers too. If a bank run starts tomorrow the whole system will collapse, because of fractional reserves. So is the banking system just a myth now, because the numbers they display dont reflect real world reserves? Nah. We as a society choose how we design our monetary system and Bitcoin tries to achieve this in a decentralized way, because the centralized approach gets abused and abused again. So people buy into Bitcoin to get out of the old system, they dont want a small group of people to control the monetary system. Its really that simple. All the design aspects of Bitcoin are to minimize human influence over it, because like ur post shows, many humans arent the brightest, so its better if no one of us can control it. Bitcoin is a real protocol that exists in the real world. We as people will determine its value, if you think its worthless then dont get it. But millions of people around the world already came to the consensus, that this form of money is more valuable to them, than some bankers toy. And more and more people will come to this conclusion when they see what the previous system will do to them in due time, then even you will realize what value it has, to have decentralized system ready, that is open to everyone. And the myth will probably save your ass. So keep spreading bs, and in the meantime we are here to build a system, that will even save a clowns ass.

I believe in bitcoin. Bitcoin is true and it is not a Myth. Bitcoin is real. I already earn with bitcoin. If it is not true?then, where my money comes? Is there any sites that would give an amount of money out from nothing?

Come on! This post won't help me and anyone else who would love to invest with bitcoin.

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Revolution. That's the story. When you invest in a system and that system is void of anything, which makes it impossible for you to return your investment back, you are left with language, rhetoric, stories, narrative. You need to fantasize about revolution and present the system to the public in that way. You have to dump the worthless certificates of that system. You just proved my point nicely.