Looking forward to my debate with Giacomo Zucco as always I will be civil and rational. Focusing on the issues, countering any FUD and making strong arguments. Asking for advise from the Bitcoin Cash community, how do you think I should aproach this?
I have published an article in response to "Bitcoin: Emergent Consensus" by Vin Armani. This is a counter argument to the governance theory expressed by Armani which I think is partially to blame for the current IFP civil war:
#crypto #cryptonews #bitcoin @nocroom #Looking forward to my debate with Giacomo Zucco as always I will be civil and rational. Focusing on the issues, countering any FUD and making strong arguments. Asking for advise from the Bitcoin Cash community, how do you think I should aproach this?
There's a thread on /r/bitcoin: "If SegWit breaks Bitcoin, why hasn't Litecoin been attacked?". Is there a good counter-argument to this?
I'll probably just get downvoted but I am wondering about this. I am neutral on the BCC/BTC debate and I browse both subreddits. It seems like they have a good point about this but I am not good with a technical side of SegWit. Is there something I am missing?
"What if I know more about Bitcoin, blockchain, socialism, capitalism and human psychology than you do. Because if you’re attacking me, and not my message — you clearly have no counter argument. So let me show you, what you fail to see."
The Bitcoin fanatics are left-leaning, rather young and poor. Or at least — they consider themselves poor, because they buy it to “get wealthy”. They are perfect candidates for the Bitcoin cult. They learned about fiat currency, about money, understand how central banks work and despise them. I do to. They suck. They are socialism in its purest form. Whoever thinks the US is a capitalist country should think twice — whoever controls the money controls the markets. The money is controlled by the FED and the government. You learned that. You know that. Most people don’t. Therefore you’re “smart”. And now you will get wealthy with those Bitcoins you bought for a few hundred or a few thousand dollars. Because “future”! That’s the story the “Bitcoin gurus” like John McAfee tell everyone to make them join the cult. Needless to say — all those gurus are literally taking your money. What you fail to see is that you learned one single lesson in history, but you forgot to “read your Kindleberger”. You forgot that “Bitcoin” has already been invented. A million times. In the history. Of humanity. That you know 0,000000000001% of… This is not the first time we are facing a monetary disaster created by the morons in the government and central banks. It dates back at least to ancient Greece. I like Greece. I studied ancient Greece most of my adolescence. I highly recommend it. Everything that’s happening today happened in ancient Greece. Then Rome. Then every other civilisation. It’s always the same story. And always the same “bitcoins”. It repeats in cycles. Seriously, “read your Kindleberger”.
03-14 21:04 - 'Well done. I've never encountered that counter before, and I make this argument often. / I think the assumption on my part that bitcoin will be so successful that it creates a fixed supply of money has to go. / I don'...' by /u/SilencingNarrative removed from /r/Bitcoin within 7-17min
''' Well done. I've never encountered that counter before, and I make this argument often. I think the assumption on my part that bitcoin will be so successful that it creates a fixed supply of money has to go. I don't think its possible for there to be a strictly fixed supply of money. As good as bitcoin is, there is always the risk that some exploitable protocol flaw will be discovered that will render it worthless. Or that another crypto currency will come along with a better overall set of incentives between wallet holders, node operators, miners, and developers. Or that another crypto will come along with better protocol details like signature algorithms, proof of work algorithm, block distribution mechanism, block reward handling and privacy guarantees. So at a minimum, there will always be a number of forms of money that compete for market share and the combined market cap of those will grow and shrink over time. So by sitting on any one form of money, the holder is making a bet, not unlike the bet one makes with holding shares of stock, and thereby taking a risk. I do think that those bets will yield a much more predictable return than, say, buying shares of an index fund like S&P 500 and holding that, but you would be nuts to put most of your savings over your working life into a top dog like bitcoin and not invest in other asset classes. I do think that central banks will lose the ability to manipulate interest rates through printing money and fractional reserve (because people will park their cash into hard cryptos rather than allow CBs to steal from them), and that this will push the economy into deflationary territory, at which point fiat currencies will also stabilize become mostly deflationary. So while overall I expect the money supply to stabilize and no longer be easy for CBs/GVTs to manipulate, the exact supply will fluctuate just as commodity prices do relative to one another and economic conditions. That said, the banking system is so fragile compared to the bitcoin network that, when it next stumbles, I expect the current top dog, bitcoin, to suck up a huge amount of liquidity in the process. So I believe our original point of disagreement was whether small amounts of deflation were enough to cause an economy to go into a death spiral, or if they tend to fix themselves. If they generally don't fix themselves, then the argument for outlawing hard cryptos starts to gain teeth. I am still asserting that small amounts of deflation fix themselves, and attempting to ban the use of hard cryptos is like trying to ban criticism of the government in order to reinfornce its authority so it can fix things more efficiently without criticism. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: SilencingNarrative
Best way to counter "bitcoin is nothing more than a speculative bubble" argument?
This seems to be the naysayer's number one position. Personally I think this line of reasoning is based on historical perspectives. Bitcoin is something that has never been seen or done before, so how can historical perspectives be used as a foundation to attack Bitcoin's future?
01-09 16:33 - '"Bitcoin teaches libertarians everything they didn't know about economics." It raises many good points, what's the counter-argument?' (washingtonpost.com) by /u/ethrael237 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 34-44min
Counter Argument 2: Shifting Incentives. We have now reached what I find to be the most interesting part of this entire argument, which is the way that Bitcoin can change the incentives for the ... However, a new counter-argument is suggesting that Bitcoin’s usage and dominance in the economically strapped country is extremely overstated, and is instead is being used to fuel cryptocurrency-promoting campaigns. Argument: Bitcoin Is Saving Families During the Venezuela Economic Crisis . A recent opinion piece published by the New York Times entitled “Bitcoin Has Saved My Family,” has ... So, to begin the argument in earnest, do Bitcoins have counter-party risk? No. No one can issue Bitcoins that someone else, by Bitcoin’s very nature, has a claim to. You may pledge your Bitcoins as collateral for some other transaction, but that transaction, say a loan denominated in Bitcoins, is what has counter-party risk, not the Bitcoin itself. Just like gold. So, it could qualify as a ... Bitcoin, with an algorithmically-enforced issuance rate, fits that bill. As put best by Ari Paul in a tweet, the founder of the CIO of Blocktower Capital: “Bitcoin is about ‘hard money,’ MMT says hardness doesn’t matter.” With the Pandora’s box of MMT beginning to open, Bitcoin’s value proposition only becomes stronger. Bitcoin 7 Nov at 2:51 am UTC. $8,544.80 13.92%. Bitcoin ... 1. Argument: It can be banned by the government Counter: A government ban on Bitcoin could actually make it more popular. It's called the Streisand effect. Jon Matonis so elaborately explains why and how this works in this article: Government Ban ...
Is bitcoin in a bubble? Here are some of the arguments for and against
Making a Counter Arguments to those that support the Bitcoin Lengthening Cycle Theory. Arguments that the Bitcoin Bottom is in! sunny decree. Loading... Unsubscribe from sunny decree? ... Sign in to make your opinion count. Sign in. 991 65. Don't like this video? Sign in to make ... My Argument on how the government can stop bitcoin. 100 Argumente PRO Bitcoin - Bitcoin Kurs Gründe cryptowelt. Loading... Unsubscribe from cryptowelt? ... Sign in to make your opinion count. Sign in. 116 1. Don't like this video? Sign in to make ... 📈Bitcoin Bottom in?📈 3 new Arguments! sunny decree. Loading... Unsubscribe from sunny decree? ... Sign in to make your opinion count. Sign in. 1,063 24. Don't like this video? Sign in to ...