2Mon
It's always relatively exhausting when someone tries to convince you and doesn't realize that they may have gotten themselves into something. Many crypto disciples are particularly intense and believe they are acting as saviors. But I ask myself the question: why invest in anything (whether crypto, shares or anything else) for a lifetime? What is the point of investing without the intention of selling?
•
55
•2Mon
@Cype Because I am investing in an idea. In other words, in the currency that will be in your wallet decades later.
••
2Mon
@Pauljj That's exactly what I mean, always this feeling of "superiority", the need to predict the future for others. My first BTC transaction took place in 2014, so you don't need to tell me anything. I have very strong doubts that even 1 Satoshi will be in my possession in the "next few decades". Most people don't like to hear that, but technology continues to develop, in a few decades there will be something better, something new, nobody will be interested in BTC anymore
•
22
•2Mon
@Cype Very nice. Have a nice evening
••
@Cype If Bitcoin fails, there will never be another opportunity comparable to Bitcoin. Your statement that technology continues to develop is of course true, but it clearly shows that you have not understood Bitcoin.
•
11
•2Mon
@stefan_21 Ultimately, you're just confirming what I said. Your statement is so utopian, as if there would be no groundbreaking new technologies in the future that would offer comparable opportunities. It is already the case that a change is taking place within 1-2 generations that nobody could have expected. My grandpa (God rest his soul :)) would have declared me crazy if I had told him as a child that in a few years there would be self-driving cars, that everyone would have a small device in their pocket with which they could communicate worldwide, that they could translate pretty much any language and whatnot, or that there would be robots with which you could have real conversations, etc. To believe that this development will materialize or stop at Bitcoin is naive at best. It's always the same lay you get to hear: limited quantity, deflation, pseudo-anonym, Austrian school, he didn't understand it, evil fiat, us against them up there blah blah blah, always the same. The "argument" of not having understood it is one of my favorites, as if it were quantum physics or something similar. You can understand Bitcoin both technically and ideologically without coming to the conclusion that this technology is the opportunity humanity has been waiting for.
•
11
•@Cype I agree with you about technological progress in itself. However, a decentralized, monetary network like Bitcoin will never exist again if Bitcoin fails. Bitcoin was extremely vulnerable in the first few years; any major company could have disrupted the network to such an extent that it would probably have been over before it really got started.
Bitcoin is now this decentralized network and only Bitcoin. All other cryptocurrencies are not. This is also the big difference between Bitcoin and alts, which is often not understood.
If Bitcoin fails now and something like this is tried again, it will certainly be attacked and prevented. After all, the states don't want to have their currency monopoly taken away from them.
What's more, Bitcoin is constantly evolving. I don't just mean 2nd layer solutions like Lightning and Liquid, but also simple updates like Taproot, for example. Anyone can write an improvement proposal and, if it is supported by the majority of the network, it will be integrated (which admittedly happens very rarely, because of course the change has to be as small as possible to ensure security). But this is also why quantum computers will never become a problem for Bitcoin, because then it will simply be switched to "quantum-safe" addresses in an update. There are already several proposals for this today.
Bitcoin is now this decentralized network and only Bitcoin. All other cryptocurrencies are not. This is also the big difference between Bitcoin and alts, which is often not understood.
If Bitcoin fails now and something like this is tried again, it will certainly be attacked and prevented. After all, the states don't want to have their currency monopoly taken away from them.
What's more, Bitcoin is constantly evolving. I don't just mean 2nd layer solutions like Lightning and Liquid, but also simple updates like Taproot, for example. Anyone can write an improvement proposal and, if it is supported by the majority of the network, it will be integrated (which admittedly happens very rarely, because of course the change has to be as small as possible to ensure security). But this is also why quantum computers will never become a problem for Bitcoin, because then it will simply be switched to "quantum-safe" addresses in an update. There are already several proposals for this today.
•
11
•