I really like how you frame this (we are already hyperbitcoinized). The idea that hyperbitcoinization is the world where you have the option to use bitcoin and that is enough is very compelling to me.

One pushback though to your thought experiment is this: if we were suddenly living beneath the iron heel of Tonald Drump or Sosef Jtalin, people will only trade for what they believe has value, (at least at first) I don't think there are enough people in the world who think bitcoin has value to make an economy work.

Bitcoin can resist a dictator, but it can't resist an uninterested market. If we can't find a person willing to trade for it, it won't help us achieve the freedom we all are hoping for--even if nobody can stop us from sending/receiving.

All the meetups in the world are still too small a number. I'm sure an authoritarian regime could help bitcoin grow--people using it because its the only money you can use to escape controls--but if this happened tomorrow, you simply couldn't acquire the vast majority of the necessities of daily life.

We may have the freedom to send and receive bitcoin however we like, but the rest of the world has the freedom to completely ignore bitcoin. Until more people make the choice to see bitcoin as valuable, I don't think our freedom to use bitcoin buys us the full promise of its a bitcoin economy.

And this maybe is what people mean when they dream of hyperbitcoinization: a world where you can spend bitcoin in a lot more places than now.

(I really do like how you frame this, though. Its snappy and compelling. And for whatever it's worth, it didnt feel to me like AI wrote it.)

Yes, we do. It's that or death.

It is Bitcoin or slavery. It is Bitcoin or death. If you still don't understand what "sovereign individual" you will never understand what is Bitcoin, whatever you will do or think you have good knowledge about Bitcoin, you will still not understand it.

Why? Because is the ultimate power tool for a sovereign individual.

So no, we are still not hyperbitcoinized. Why? People are still so many statists and fiat maxis among bitcoiners.

FIAT DELENDA EST. And only when fiat dies, we can consider a bitcoinized world.

This is great except that your piece on “hyper bitcoinization is just not true by definition. We have the freedom to now save in a secured decentralized assets, but that doesn’t manor it “hyper”. Great piece though, I enjoyed it.

This whole post seems like it was written by AI

💯

The idea of a Bitcoin utopia is often discussed, where everyone has a lightning node on their phone, there are no exchange rates or fees, and financial freedom is the norm. Families and corporations would run lightning nodes, promoting trust and collaboration while empowering them to control their finances by cutting out the middleman and reducing transaction fees. Bitcoin is already hard decentralized money, which provides an alternative to a centralized inflationary fiat system, and people have the option to participate, which is a form of freedom. Bitcoin provides all its intended value when all the worst things happen, such as a dictatorship or communism, because it cannot be taken away, and as long as even a few nodes are maintained, the network will persist. Bitcoin is already underground, existing in meetups and exchanges that can occur in any setting and with any group.

I find your writing very entertaining, but not educating. Thank you. But you really sound like a someone from an elite-privilege background. If you still believe "we're already hyperbitcoinized, I challenge you to leave your "comfort zone" and come to Africa for some adventure. "We're not hyperbitcoinized" yet!

Wow, so many things I want to touch on. First about the decentralization. You said you wanted the future where everybody has a lightning node. Keep in mind lightning labs is a private entity, and we need to move beyond lightning in order for Bitcoin to truly thrive. Secondly you say, imagine the world or corporations and individuals I like are running nodes. Truly, a utopia will not have corporations. Advancing the world cannot happen, unless private property is abolished, that's not to say bitcoin, which is personal property but if we're still living in a world where individuals or single entities have ownership over massive amounts of wealth and resources, then we're never actually going to get to any type of "utopia." Third you never actually defined utopia. To imagine a worst case scenario with either a fascist leader, or communist world. I'm willing to bet euros to croissants, dollars to donuts that you don't understand what communism is. If you did, you would understand that true Marxist, see a world without currency that through advancements in Socialism meeting advancing society through several stages of large transformations, including political, social, and technological advancements we could make the world rely less on payment. In which case that world bitcoin could still thrive especially because one of the biggest reasons capitalist, refute Marxist theory is because it's hard to tell how much something is value based on how valuable is two individuals. A.k.a. something like the diamond water theory like how water is worth way less than diamonds but yeah, it's necessary for you to live in diamonds aren't. And finally. Bitcoin is moving from the underground pretty quickly into the main stream. With a few nations adopting it as currency with major, multinational, corporations, experimenting with it as payment it's one of those things where it's moving gradually, and then suddenly. Said, you never really made any actual points like what's the point of this whole post?

A circular bitcoin economy is a good goal to aim for and I think we're slowly making solid progress towards it. Even if you forget El Salvador, look at what Bitcoin Lightning has done to onboard so many people for microtransactions. And SN is another example. Many more will come now the momentum has kicked off. Supply and demand yo.

I think how trusted it is as an asset - which will ultimately determine participation in a growing Bitcoin economy - is a generational issue. Most people middle age and up, in the West at least, do not trust Bitcoin.

But the younger generations have a very different perception. Here, many do see Bitcoin as a store of value like gold and are very serious in their faith in Bitcoin.

And even outside young platforms like Nostr and SN, BTC has been used to facilitate real life transactions for decades now. Started off with that little thing called Silk Road.

I think people underestimate how big of a deal it is when people - especially sellers - are happy to trade in Bitcoin (and Monero more recently) on the darknet. They're literally trusting software with their very freedom.

And now we got an excited community putting this to all sorts of uses from zapping people they like on social media to V4V content creation to even Nostr + Lightning based marketplaces.

We're getting there. Won't happen overnight but we're getting there.

But no, most won't run their own nodes. However, as the barrier to entry is lowered by fancy UX's, the number will only go up. And I'm comfortable enough managing my node now that I'm more than happy to sell my friends they can have an account on mine if they trust to trust a friend instead of a company.

вчера я понял... биткоин создан для большего... вчера мне нужно было 24 киловатт для добычи 10000 монет и покупки 2х пицца. сейчас мне нужно 24 киловатт для 35000 сат и купить 2 пицца.