A BTC centric economy absolutely is crucial for it to be a success. Otherwise 100% of it's value would remain speculative.. meaning that it could lose most or nearly all of it's value at any moment.

ac04 said:

---

a BTC centric economy is not a requirement for bitcoin to be a success. it is better suited as an asset than a currency. when was the last time there was a gold centric economy? you're also giving the US government way too much credit, they can't figure out whether to scratch their watch or wind their ass and somehow they're going to take down a decentralized global network? not likely. what is more likely is that states will lead the way on bitcoin legislation just like they're doing with marijuana. and there are numerous states actively creating favorable legislation for bitcoin.

as for the majority of people who desire to be governed ever harder, they will be the laggards who figure it out too late. just like they do on everything else now.

---

The US government runs the entire global economy. It all exists because we prop it up and protect it. It's damn near impossible to overstate the power of the federal government. Not sure how you can argue differently.

I'm all in for a Convention of States but I'm not aware of any effort to put BTC on the agenda. If it ever happens they will push for a balanced budget amendment but that doesn't mean anything to BTC. At this point it probably takes an amendment to force the end of the USD as our currency and to my knowledge nobody in a position of power is talking about this. BTC friendly legislation at the state level is a nice idea but it doesn't directly confront the monster than is the Fed and their grip on the economy vis a vis the dollar. While the Fed wasn't created by an amendment that's the only way the states can force the federal government to do something this drastic.

As long as BTC is just digital gold it's really not suited for much of anything. It's currently a niche investment with little practical application and thus has a value that is completely speculative. The only way that ever changes is if the world did decide to adopt it as a global reserve which requires the US government to change dramatically.

again, it is extremely unlikely that BTC will replace USD and it doesn't need to. not sure why some of you are so stuck on that idea.

it is clear that you don't understand why bitcoin has value and you aren't interested in figuring it out so that you can continue with the purely speculative narrative. and that's fine i guess. but that doesn't make it true.

There's a group of us that talk BTC offline. You have any interest in joining, shoot me an email

ac04 said:

---

again, it is extremely unlikely that BTC will replace USD and it doesn't need to. not sure why some of you are so stuck on that idea.

it is clear that you don't understand why bitcoin has value and you aren't interested in figuring it out so that you can continue with the purely speculative narrative. and that's fine i guess. but that doesn't make it true.

---

we're stuck on that idea because it gets floated as the future global reserve which means replacing the dollar. And no I don't understand why it has value. There's literally nothing tangible there. Kind of like the dollar it has value because two people agree it does. The biggest difference obviously is that the dollar is backed by the American taxpayer and BTC is backed by the ability to find the next guy that agrees on its value. Not saying that in a bad way it's just reality.

As ac04 asked me earlier in this thread, does our conversation here in the digital space make it any less tangible?

What is this conversation worth?

BTC has value because you can go exchange it for currency which is backed by the American taxpayer, that's it.

I think BTC will always exist simply because it is the first mover in crypto and criminals use it so it will always have a market.

The vast majority of the transactions are USD to BTC, not the other way around. BTCs current value is a function of the following, for most people.
1. It's a store of value asset that can't be censored, altered, is decentralized, and is scarce.
2. It can be exchanged for other things the holder deems to have value instantly, with final settlement, and across any border.

Probably in that order. I really like XpressAg09s comment from another thread and feel it's probably worth reposting here.

Quote:

---

the pro-BTC camp is buying what they think to be a commodity with high future value at a current lower value price

---

CDUB98 said:

---

As ac04 asked me earlier in this thread, does our conversation here in the digital space make it any less tangible?

---

This conversation has value to you and I because we presumably have a level of respect for each other and this value each other's opinions. If the next guy thinks one of us is an idiot what is this conversation worth to him?

That's not the question. The question is, does this conversation being solely in the digital space make it any less tangible?

As in. Can you literally touch it? Sure. I can physically touch this conversation.

Because an oral conversation isn't tangible in an sense of the word.

TexasRebel said:

---

As in. Can you literally touch it? Sure. I can physically touch this conversation.

Because an oral conversation isn't tangible in an sense of the word.

---

Good gawd, y'all are hard headed. This is my last response to y'all. Y'all are dug in no matter what.

The point is that whether in real life or in the digital space, this conversation is just as real. Here on TexAgs, it is nothing more than 1s and 0s displayed on a screen. Bitcoin is the same.

I'm not a BTC adopter yet, but I can also see some relevance for it and be open minded. Y'all can keep living like cavemen and never adapting and changing. The rest of society will move on.

CDUB98 said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

As in. Can you literally touch it? Sure. I can physically touch this conversation.

Because an oral conversation isn't tangible in an sense of the word.

---

Good gawd, y'all are hard headed. This is my last response to y'all. Y'all are dug in no matter what.

The point is that whether in real life or in the digital space, this conversation is just as real. Here on TexAgs, it is nothing more than 1s and 0s displayed on a screen. Bitcoin is the same.

I'm not a BTC adopter yet, but I can also see some relevance for it and be open minded. Y'all can keep living like cavemen and never adapting and changing. The rest of society will move on.

---

You're asking the wrong question. You primary question is really about intrinsic value, not tangibility.

Intrinsic value and tangibility often go hand in hand, and IMO, our pages long arguments here certainly do.

If you read back through my jumbled thoughts in this thread, you'll start to see a shift in my own thinking.

What makes something intrinsic?

What makes something tangible?

When are the two dependent upon each other?

It seems we have all had our own answers to these questions and have very little alignment. Until we (society/investors) can come to some kind of agreement, I think we will continue to have these same arguments.

They do but intrinsic value is the baseline source of value, current and future.
Some say gold has no intrinsic value but its definitely tangible. Opposite of that, now they've eliminated stock certificates, equities aren't exactly tangible but I'd argue they do have intrinsic value.

eta: real estate is both tangible (to the owner with a mortgage) and intrinsic (to the bank or investors that possess the mortgage)

trying to imagine how TexasRebel made this conversation tangible, not sure if he printed it out or if he was maybe touching his monitor? either way he remains a fountain of baffling comments. i'm starting to think he might just be a brilliant troll.

ac04 said:

---

again, it is extremely unlikely that BTC will replace USD and it doesn't need to. not sure why some of you are so stuck on that idea.

it is clear that you don't understand why bitcoin has value and you aren't interested in figuring it out so that you can continue with the purely speculative narrative. and that's fine i guess. but that doesn't make it true.

---

It's funny how you equate not agreeing with you as not understanding.

I understand perfectly. I also understand economics well enough to know BTC is a dead end.

I'm on a mobile device.

I have to touch the convo to scroll.

I don't want to know about any of you twits touching anything.

Weren't you the one who queried the tangibility of this conversation?

This conversation has taken a droll turn.

TexasRebel said:

---

Weren't you the one who queried the tangibility of this conversation?

---

Hence why I stated you can see my change in the thread. I'm hiding nothing.

aTmAg said:

---

Don't worry, I understand it, and I do not invest in it either.

---

I got caught up in the hype and invested a medium sized amount a few years ago.

Finally got tired of watching it circle the drain and liquidated last week with like a 60% loss.

At least now I can put that money into something that will grow.

I'm just curious, why do you think bitcoin is a dead end?

Bitcoin moves from weak hands to strong hands. I was probably on the other end of your sale, so thank you.

All this talk of intrinsic value... tangibility..."value"...

Y'all's heads are going to explode when you realize Bitcoin is in fact a novel life form, absorbing energy, creating order, replicating itself...

So now it's a horror movie?

CNBC talking last hours about more shoes to drop

as more details emerge from the "trust me we got this" crypto crowds...

TexasRebel said:

---

So now it's a horror movie?

---

Depends on how you think of symbiotic human flourishing.

Slyfox07 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Don't worry, I understand it, and I do not invest in it either.

---

I got caught up in the hype and invested a medium sized amount a few years ago.

Finally got tired of watching it circle the drain and liquidated last week with like a 60% loss.

At least now I can put that money into something that will grow.

---

hope you have some capital gains to offset those losses

exp said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

So now it's a horror movie?

---

Depends on how you think of symbiotic human flourishing.

---

Fwiw, I've said the same thing on this board as Brandon does in the interview (putting miners on nuclear plant, energy being worthless over time) and come to opposite conclusion specifically because arguments like his never address the base question fundamental value. All these ancillary benefits are cool and hopefully for all of us it works out but what is the fundamental value that necessitates adoption by anyone other than miners?


eta: what would stop a country like Russia from building a bunch of nuclear plants and dropping hundreds of thousands of miners on it to capture more BTCs for its own reserves? Would this be a good or bad thing?

Nothing stops Russia or anyone from doing that other than their own will and power to do it (access to resources required etc)

Good or bad are subjective things I don't care to dissect in this regard. Bitcoin is money for you and for your enemies. That's the nature of truly neutral money.

People that are not miners will adopt Bitcoin in an effort to separate money from state and preserve their own wealth.

Buzzy said:

---

I'm just curious, why do you think bitcoin is a dead end?

---

Because it was designed to be money and it has shown to be completely terrible at that. So much so that even many proponents who used to claim otherwise now agree with me on it. Meanwhile it has no alternate uses. So that now makes it 100% useless.

That's like "investing" in cars that are rusted out to the point that it cannot even be scrapped for materials. The only way you can make money off of them is if you can convince somebody else to pay more for than you did. That is simply a dead end investment. Even if there are people stupid enough to buy these cars, eventually somebody will get stuck holding the bag.

Good investments need to be fundamentally useful to somebody. Bitcoin is not.

Two questions…

1) How much time would you say that you've spent reading articles/books about what it is and why people think it's valuable?

2)How much time have you spent playing, or interacting, with it?