Topic: How Satoshi Nakamoto Fooled the World - page 36. (Read 8968 times)

We don't see things differently. You are imagining things that don't exist in reality. You create fictions because you lack basic knowledge of economy and finance.

People use a medium of exchange that is not credit all the time. However, this medium of exchange exists. That's the whole point. A thing must exist to be able to be exchanged. Bitcoin doesn't exist so there's nothing to exchange. People in bitcoin community blindly believe Satoshi like he is some kind of God. He wrote in his paper that his system creates coins and the community accepted that without a question. But all that his system does is attaching numbers to addresses. Then the wallet is lying that this number is quantifying "BTC" - a digital thing called Bitcoin. But this thing is non-existent. A guy with "0" attached to his address is not able to show a digital thing in his possession, the same as a guy that has 1,000 attached to his address. The last guy simply creates fictions in his imagination and believes that he owns a valuable digital product, without being able to show it. It's like a mythology. Just like people believed Zeus exists without being able to show it, bitcoin community believes bitcoin exists without being able to show it. They are blind believes in the sacred text that Satoshi wrote. It is literally unbelievable that people believe blindly an anonymous guy ever when they see with their own eyes that no digital product exist in their possession.  

I guess the question remains can you buy goods and services easily with bitcon? And the answer is yes.
Can you buy good and services easily for gold. And the answer is just about no.

So gold is not worth anything since I can't just add a drive to my cart at newegg.com and pay for it with gold but I can with bitcoin.

-Dave

We see things differently, therefore, you'll have to answer me the following, otherwise you're wasting your time in this forum: Can people use a medium of exchange that is not credit? 'Cause if they can settle transactions without debt, there's no problem on using a currency that doesn't represent anything at all, such as Bitcoin. (Or the banknotes, before they create debt)

As long as they agree that the ledger is satisfactory, they can use that one to deal with, even if the ledger represents things that don't exist tangibly and only have a unit-representation.

You didn't answer me how is Internet different than Bitcoin? How can you prove existence of the Internet? And don't say that we are talking about Bitcoin and not Internet. I want to hear from you how do you prove that Internet is a thing. Maybe that will give me an idea how to prove that Bitcoin is a thing.

It is not nice when you project your own ignorance and a lack of knowledge on others. Every paper bill handed to individuals and companies came from deposit accounts. Loans are granted on deposit accounts, and then withdrawn as cash. Numbers that represented debt on deposit accounts, in the same amount represent that debt on paper. If 1000 is withdrawn those same numbers are now on paper bills. Literally every bill, except of course counterfeit ones, represent debt that was created by issuing loans. When borrowers are paying back loans, paper bills are deposited, and from their deposit accounts are transferred for loan liquidation. In that way debt is settled. Paper bills that the central banks took out of circulation or just printed represent of course nothing. But those are not in the hands of individuals and companies. So I don't know what was the point of your last sentence. How can a central bank grant loans to commercial banks in paper bills without first printing bills? You have some bizarre way of looking at things.

No, it's not and that's where you're wrong. When I have a signed contract that says I own 10 cars, those represent something that exists. When my bank account says that I own $100 that cash supposedly exist. The hundred dollar bill ALONE does not represent something that exists. It's not debt UNTIL it's loaned. That's same for everything; they don't create debt until they're loaned.

The central bank issues banknotes that don't represent ANYTHING at first.

This is literally crazy. How do you know that bitcoin is "a thing" and that it is "new" if you're unable to prove its existence? Where're 5 things that the person bought after number 5 was attached to their address? What is that mega expensive product that the person paid $40.000 a piece? All you do is repeating "Bitcoin is this", Bitcoin is that" like a broken record, without proving anything.

It's pointless to argue with you when you don't want to accept the premise that Bitcoin is a completely new thing and that you can't compare it to anything. Is Internet real? Internet doesn't cost anything and it can't be bought, but you must agree that it's a real thing and yet, you can't prove it's existence.


True, but stocks are a representation of something. Bitcoin is not a representation of something. It's Bitcoin.

People who still have a hard time wrapping around their brains around the fact that bitcoin is a commodity are people that still thinks that they have to touch everything physically because they still can't believe that the digital age has been here for a long time and they still stick to the old values that might or might not be applicable anymore. Also, stocks are somewhat a digital commodity so I don't get why they can't believe bitcoin is one when bitcoin isn't even the first one.

Commodity is something that exists. Be it digital or not. Digital things are existing things. Books, documents, sounds, pictures...are digital. Applications are digital. Non of them can you touch. But they exist. Saying bitcoin is a digital commodity is as nonsensical as saying Zeus is a digital commodity. You can say whatever you want for a thing whose existence you are not able to prove. You can write down in a database that you own 5 shares in Zeus. If you are not able to show Zeus, that what you've written down is nonsense. That's what Satoshi's software is doing. Writing down nonsense. Fake numbers. Quantities of a thing that no one is able to show. You can as well say that bitcoin is an ice cream. Or a car. Or a diamond. It's all equally stupid as saying that bitcoin is a digital commodity.

Now you are repeating nonsense... Bitcoin is a digital commodity and digital commodities doesn't exist in a physical world. I guess you have a problem understanding that not everything has to be physical in order for it to be real. Here is a definition of a new type of commodity - crypto commodity. But I'm sure you will say one more time that it's not a real commodity because you can't touch it.

You're repeating nonsense that I already debunked. Gold is a thing that exists. Bitcoin doesn't. Saying or writing down that you own 5 ounces of gold, means you're able to show an actual metal in your possession. Otherwise you're lying. Whan you say that you own 5 bitcoins, or this is written down in your wallet, but you're not able to show a digital product in the quantity of 5, that means you're lying and that the wallet has fake numbers.
Scarcity is a concept of existing things. For something to be scarce it must exist. Bitcoin doesn't exist so it cannot be scarce.

One of the key inventions of Satoshi Nakamoto was digital scarcity. This was obtained by solving the double spending problem. You can read about it here: https://komodoplatform.com/en/academy/double-spending-problem/

That's what makes sending Bitcoin different to sending an SMS message.

I will put it in your words:

When transferring Bitcoin, people are not transferring numbers but bitcoins. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Bitcoin doesn't represent anything just like gold doesn't represent anything - they both have value for what they are - Bitcoin and gold. That is the thing you must learn to understand - Bitcoin doesn't represent anything and it's value doesn't come from it representing some other asset. It's value comes from it being Bitcoin! Just like value of gold bar comes from it being a gold bar. Just like value of water comes from it being water.

You are not storing or moving value, but numbers. A number is a concept on quantity of things. A thing is value, not a number. If there's a number "10", next to your name or address, this is suggesting that there are 10 pieces of a thing in your possession. But if the thing is not in your possession, the number is fake. And that's exactly the case with bitcoin. There's no such thing as bitcoin in the possession of an address holder which has a specific number attached to their address. So, blockchain is just a giant collection of fake numbers. And bitcoin cannot be value by definition, given it doesn't exist.

You talk nonsense and stupidity.  Cash is paper with numbers and these are put in circulation with loans. Loan is debt. Cash prove the existence of debt. No debt no cash. First the debt is created and only then numbers are used to quantity it. The same is with deposit accounts. Positive numbers on deposit accounts mean debt was created. Numbers are the consequence of debt. No debt no numbers.

The same is with everything else. A company produces cars and then they put numbers in accounting books to express quantity of cars. No cars no numbers.

Debt and cars are things that exist. Numbers are means to inform about the quantity of those EXISTING things.

Numbers are also attached to bitcoin addresses. But there's no thing which is quantified with them. This is called fake numbers. It's like invoice that lists the products or services that were never sold to a costumer. Bitcoin wallet has quantities of a product that was never sold to a wallet holder. That's a fraud. And you are one of the online promotors of that fraud. You are constantly spreading misinformation that people are buying bitcoin but such digital product was never sold to people.

This is the absolutely beautiful and stunning, for many people inconceivable (as we see here) thing about Bitcoin. The first time ever, we have a way to digitally store and move real value and not just an 'IOU', a reference pointing to some real value.

That's why the often asked question 'what backs Bitcoin' is so wrong, too. It's very much engrained in most people's way of thought since that's the only thing they've ever known - paper money, totally understandable. But just like you wouldn't ask 'what backs gold' or 'what backs your house', asking about Bitcoin's backing is pointless.

Bitcoin is value, it doesn't represent value. Bitcoins very much do exist, just not the way you're used to. As simple as that.

No you didn't, you only said that it's a liability, which is true. Debt, from credit cards to government bonds, is a liability, and a liability can be described as:
You pay up debt (which is the liability) with either assets or liabilities (which creates even more debt). At some point, assets will have to be transacted as these are the promised gains. For example, base money (cash).

Cash is NOT a liability. It's considered asset. Therefore, cash, ALONE, does NOT represent debt. Once someone starts loaning this cash, debt will be created. Agreed so far?

The level of your ignorance is stunning. I just proved to you the existence of debt. I proved that the debt is an existing thing and that the numbers that quantity that thing are therefore genuine.

And your response is: "bitcoin the same". Hahaha. In a rational discussion, what you are supposed to do, is to show a thing called bitcoin. Only in that way you can prove that the numbers attached to the addresses are genuine. You are not supposed to make nonsensical claims of equivalence between an existing thing and a thing whose existence you must demonstrate.

So, can you demonstrate the existence of bitcoin? Can you show where's that revolutionary digital commodity? No, you can't. You already demonstrated that you can't. All you can do is talk nonsense and play semantics.

Exactly, it's a liability. The asset which is promised to be paid is nothing but fiat currency. Fiat currency is nothing more than "numbers" whose power is forcefully indicated by the government. When I own $100, I only own the papers that say so.

You fail, miserably, to understand that the same happens with Bitcoin, but there's no authority that enforces its usage.