pull down to refresh

If Bitcoin’s onchain throughput 100x’d today, it wouldn’t even double adoption.x.com/SDWouters/status/1934321076047147505
202 sats \ 4 comments \ @Scoresby 15 Jun bitcoin

Sam Wouters wrote a post about how scalability isn't really the problem with Bitcoin: it's that bitcoin is losing the PR battle.

Not sure if in fully agree with it, but the point resonates when mempools are empty and fee rates are often 0 sats per vByte.

write
preview
related posts
299 sats \ 2 replies \ @spiderman 16 Jun

I agree with some of his statements, but not his overall sentiment. The adoption may be slower than some would expect or like, but the major barrier is peoples' stupidity, and I see it as my opportunity. So I see no incentive to accelerate the process, to be honest, from my point of view. That is why I do not orange pill, I do not talk about it to anyone I know, I do not go to Bitcoin conferences or meetups, do not wear a Bitcoin t-shirt.

I consider myself a latecomer to Bitcoin, not because I ever believed in Fiat (stacking Gold since I started having any meaningful savings), but somewhat because of my own laziness to understand Bitcoin-the theory (secure hash, elliptic curve cryptography, Blockchain) and operation (how to work with a node and wallet). I didn't put money into something I do not understand. But now that I see the light, I need more time to stack enough and a faster adoption (meaning an inevitable price surge) is not helpful to me.

I remember a YouTube video from a Bitcoin blogger who went to some Philippines island where a shop said they took Bitcoin for payment last year. Asked why not this year, the nonchalant answer (from the owner) was he found it difficult to convert, and forgot some password. This was a year when Bitcoin had a big bull-run, and their peso was going down against USD. He does not want more money, he just wants familiarity.

My conclusion (after watching many such episodes) is, too many poor people, would rather suffer, watch their savings evaporate and complain, than spending a tiny bit of intellectual horsepower to think and act outside their comfort zone. Their inertia is my opportunity.

This also brings me to my next point and that runs contrary to what many maxis and BTC evangelists imply, who say adoption happens at grassroot. Not really, a few BTC circular economies you see in Latin America or Africa stay alive only by Bitcoin donation from some NGOs. To me, it is functionally like Keynesian money printing when a massive NGO (the Federal reserve) is injecting Sats (liquidity) into a small village to keep the circular economy alive. The ones close to the money spigot (whoever gets the donation) benefits the most, then they spend the Sats to buy groceries. That is as sustainable as a Fiat ponzi scheme.

The very bitcoin OGs, starting from Nakamoto and the Pizza guys...were not necessarily ultra-wealthy but easily among the top rung in terms of intellectual horse power. But beyond that, and a few who see the light, most of the adoption eventually has to happen via institutions, whether Blackrock, JP Morgan, Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund, Emarat (the Dubai oil company taking Bitcoin) or massive treasury adoption by Apple, Google etc.

Yes, of course, if an ordinary guy could pack his bags well before Blackrock or JP Morgan came in, the reward could be mind blowing, but most ordinary guys prefer their comfort zone. They will adopt it too, either after they (or their kids) get repriced in it, or as their national currencies collapse. Remember Gresham's law followed by Their's law? The next door pizza seller? He would adopt when you get a large pizza for ~500 sats and rue the day why he did not accept it when he could sell the same pizza for ~10,000 sats.

reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @clr 16 Jun

Thanks for sharing your point of view. I just would like to understand if you want to answer:

  • I imagine that coming from gold, you view Bitcoin as an improvement to gold — digital store of value. But gold already failed as medium of exchange and unit of account. Fiat is better for those two purposes (you cannot make digital transfers with gold).
  • Circular economies as socialism: I don't disagree, and Satoshi himself was a socialist under that lens: he donated his time, wrote the software, gave up riches, fame, recognition, etc., for bitcoin to succeed. I think comparing the circular economies with a Ponzi is not correct because bitcoin itself is valuable worldwide, even outside of their circle.
  • Telling family and friends: when I discovered bitcoin, I couldn't stop talking about it. I had the same thought, but I also thought that they didn't have enough money as to alter the price significantly.
  • When I see this point of view, it always seems to come from people who live in "developed" countries and have fiat privileges: I don't know about you, but I assume you have several bank accounts, credit and debit cards, and whatnot. If your fiat privileges were revoked for whatever reason (bank accounts closed/frozen), maybe you would like to be able to spend bitcoin easily and have a wide bitcoin acceptance in society. That's why I want bitcoin to be accepted as MoE and ultimately UoA and I don't think that makes me a socialist (it's ultimately for selfish reasons).
  • How will you flourish in a society where transactions are surveiled, tracked and blocked and using bitcoin is heavily punished? The "rational" economic analysis never accounts for tyranny. You will probably be among the richest guys in the prison and you will be able to purchase tuna cans, a radio, pay for phone calls... but is that really the future you want for yourself?
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @spiderman 17 Jun
  • Ok
  • I did not say socialism. But most of those so called circular economies sustain by Sats coming in from outside, as donations. I argue the donations are functionally similar to liquidity injection/quant easing, and hence do not test the circular economies' true sustainability, on how they can stand on their own feet. To be honest, I have not travelled to one myself, and not aware of all the nuances in terms of how exactly Bitcoin enters and circulates. But it is also my impression many of them rise as flash in the pan, and are undone during the bear market drawdowns. Happy to be corrected. Out of all the places I visited myself, I liked Lugano (Switzerland), as it seems many businesses accept Bitcoin, but don't know if that is counted as a circular economy.
  • Glad to know you love to talk about Bitcoin, it's your personal choice, which I respect. I am not that much of a talker, but never under the illusion that my family is rich enough to move the market even if they wanted. Still I do not feel being an evangelist is beneficial to me. My own parents are not that savvy, and they are incredibly scared and timid to put their money even in an index fund, let alone Bitcoin, which, to them, is still a scam. I do not have the time and patience to change anyone's mind.
  • If all my fiat assets were blocked by the institutions, then yes, I would have to spend BTC and Gold. That is why I buy BTC mostly in cash from some dealers I know, who I can sell to as well. The likelihood of that happening is small, but I lack the political capital to make BTC a MoE against the merchants' wish. I suspect if such a thing was to happen, that will accelerate BTC adoption by itself. But I do not even have a whole Bitcoin, so not like I will benefit a lot if BTC is the medium of exchange tomorrow. But my forecast is not Fiats dying by a big bang, but a slow death over next few decades. I do not imply or allege that you are a socialist, but if you are comfortable with your stack, then you have more incentive to push for hyperbitcoinisation tomorrow, than me.
  • If in a society transactions are heavily surveilled and tracked, the answer is not necessarily Bitcoin, the answer is in second amendment. Look at the European Union, for example. They are even considering a bill classify public key (or their hash) as personal data, which will prohibit storing them on the Blockchain. This is equivalent to banning Bitcoin altogether. Is Bitcoin the solution to such a government? No, silly. The antidote to that is violent revolution to undo the government if citizens think so. You remember how FDR confiscated gold? Did gold itself solve the problem of gold confiscation?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 15 Jun
reply