bitcoin doesnt get stored on your computer.
heck even if you check the block data. and raw transactions you will not see a single BTC.
yep transactions and blockdata is measured in satoshis.
its just represented as BTC in the graphic user interface.
meaning a btc is virtual(temporary ram and graphic displayed.)
its like having 10x£1 coins and saying you have a £10 bank note.
value wise yes you have £10.. but you dont have a £10 bank note.
so if you showed someone a UTXO and provided a signature to prove key linkage to that utxo you have to admit you have a bunch of satoshis. as there is no 'physical' proof of any btc
having the only set of keys does not mean ownership either. take real estate. the bank owns the house not the mortgage payer. even if the mortgage payer has the only keys to access the house
also if you gave a set of keys to a airbnb vacationer. do they suddenly own the home.. no.
as for defining bitcoin as a hard asset.. sorry but no. its digital.
dare i say it an internet crash or a EMP that blacks out all tech.. and bye bye digital assets
its not something you can store under a faraday caged pillow and just hand to someone the next day
also declaring all fiat as digital as your way to work around the physical/digital divide does not work and is also innaccurate because bank notes are real and physical and you can hide them under your pillow
putting a wallet under your pillow does not make the contents physical if the contents are still digital. and a paper wallet is not bitcoin. its a private key..
yes wallets in terms of bitcoin should be more analogous to keyrings. you know the thing you store the keys together
seems jetcash is trying to be a 70yo white guy trying to start a new twitter trend. that alone is enough to show it wont catch on
..
funniest part is.. you want to define bitcoin as physical. and then promote a digital investor..
so what is your game. bitcoiners are not digital investors..?
but people with fiat under their pillow or in their physical wallet are digital investors??
.. now your just making no sense at all...
if you need to redefine something to be out of scope of common sense. then its not going to be a thing.
common sense will prevail. and the other nonsense will only exist in the small communities of idiots
if you want to redefine things to make more common sense inregards to bitcoin
1. keyrings, not wallets
2. bitcoin the protocol/network. sats the currency units, btc the digital term for an allotment of 100m sats
like gold the mineral.. ounces the currency unit, tonnes the physical term for alottment of gold
like fiat. pounds the currency unit. grand the term for 1000 pounds
3. if its not on the chain. it doesnt exist. bitcoin currency is not bitcoin until its confirmed onchain
the reason these need clarifications is because for instance people using altnetworks and sidechains think they fully own 'bitcoin' even when playing with different tokens pretending to be bitcoin
things like the myql database of exchanges.. mtgox users learned this the hard way after depositing funds
things like LN HTLC promsory notes measured in 12+ decimals that wont ever be broadcast and confirmed on the blockchain
Topic: Virters understand that some virtual assets can be hard assets. (Read 88 times)
I'm a Bitcoin maximalist, but I don't believe that any one coin will replace the other coins for this decade. I think the coins will be Bitcoin, Gold, Silver and Copper, and they all have their own advantages and uses. Canny preppers should own a mix of those coins to carry themselves through the grand reset.
Actually my main reason for starting this thread was the result of my having picked up http://Virters.com , and I was wondering if I had a chance of using that to describe a class of investor. It could be a good chance to explain the unique advantage of Bitcoin.
Having such domain will be good, but I think there are many other ways to promote bitcoin, like what Microstrategy CEO do say about bitcoin and the reason it can not be compared to other assets like gold (that bitcoin will be superior), that bitcoin have just limited supply, the reason of the possibility of its price growing further in the future. Bitcoin is bitcoin, although could be a virtual asset, but its intrinsic value makes it superior to even physical assets. Real assets are physical assets just as described below, fiat is not part of real assets, real assets like estates have inherent physical worth. I will consider cash as a financial asset, its worth is not in the physical paper but its intrinsic value. Even, fiat can be represented in digital value that makes it to still be virtual.
Real assets are not just things you can kick, but things you can own absolutely. Fiat currencies are just a record of a promise with no intrinsic value. Bitcoin is unique amongst the crypto coins in that it really does have a real value. Some alts have better use cases, but they have a central point of control, or that are vulnerable to attacks.
Actually my main reason for starting this thread was the result of my having picked up http://Virters.com , and I was wondering if I had a chance of using that to describe a class of investor. It could be a good chance to explain the unique advantage of Bitcoin.
Never mind my opinion about this, I may not be totally right, but in accordance to what I have just learnt about real, financial, virtual and hard assets.
I want to put together a site that shows that some assets that people consider to be real are in fact virtual - fiat currencies is one example.
Real assets are physical assets just as described below, fiat is not part of real assets, real assets like estates have inherent physical worth. I will consider cash as a financial asset, its worth is not in the physical paper but its intrinsic value. Even, fiat can be represented in digital value that makes it to still be virtual. Gold and Bitcoin are hard assets with absolute title.
If fleet of trucks for the delivery of consumer goods, land, real estate, and commodities are considered as real asset class, I do not think Bitcoin should be considered as a hard asset because it is completely virtual in design. The idea is to expand the ownership of both Bitcoin and domain names. So do you think that virters is a viable name for investors in virtual assets?
I think this is a good idea. In my opinion, Bitcoin and domain names are both virtual asset as they are completely digital in design.Quote from: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_assets
Real Assets is an investment asset class that covers investments in physical assets such as real estate, energy, and infrastructure. Real assets have an inherent physical worth. Real assets differ from financial assets in that financial assets get their value from a contractual right and are typically intangible.
Quote from: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_asset
A financial asset is a non-physical asset whose value is derived from a contractual claim, such as bank deposits, bonds, and participations in companies' share capital. Financial assets are usually more liquid than other tangible assets, such as commodities or real estate.
A virtual asset is a digital representation of value that can be digitally traded or transferred, and can be used for payment or investment purposes. One example is Bitcoin, which is a virtual currency.
A hard asset refers to a tangible asset or resource with fundamental value. Examples of hard assets include a fleet of trucks for the delivery of consumer goods, land, real estate, and commodities.
A company and shares of a company are virtual assets that people consider to be physical.
Regardless, "ownership" and "possession" are social constructs, so all possessions are ultimately virtual.
Regardless, "ownership" and "possession" are social constructs, so all possessions are ultimately virtual.
Ok,so I'm trying to create "virters" as a new word to describe savvy virtual asset investors. I want to put together a site that shows that some assets that people consider to be real are in fact virtual - fiat currencies is one example. Others like UK freehold land and domain names are just an interest in the title, and not an absolute possession. Gold and Bitcoin are hard assets with absolute title. The idea is to expand the ownership of both Bitcoin and domain names. So do you think that virters is a viable name for investors in virtual assets?
Jump to: