pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @nerd2ninja 5 Jun 2023 \ on: Isn't that funny that HK regulate crypto meanwhile US attacks Binance? bitcoin
The problem is, you don't understand the difference between shutting down scams and enabling Bitcoin trading.
Please elaborate...
reply
I can not find an easy to point to definition for Bitcoin. Things like shell money, salt, gold, aggi beads, tend to fall under "commodity money" but would Rai stones fall under commidity money? Community money doesn't even help because community money is defined as paper scrip that a company issues for use within the local community!
reply
Yep ok Govs=Company, Company_script=money, franchise=?
Or you're saying that HK is deliberately regulating to define crypto as a new company_script? HK=China's franchise ?
I still not seeing a clear connection between what you're saying and the title of this post.
reply
This is another problem. You want answers told to you instead of thinking about it.
Take every shitcoin you like. What category of money do they fall under? I do not want to tell you how to think, I just want you to think.
Bitcoin has been categorized as "cryptocurrency", but cryptocurrency is not a type of money. Its as silly as saying dollars are "water mark money" and every company that issues water mark money is of the same value as government water mark money. That is not the case. Government money is Fiat, company money is company scrip. Watermarks are just the security mechanism, not the classification of money.
reply
Well, my title question was a bit sarcastic, ok. Not looking for answers, just trying to translate your thoughts in something I can comprehend and I think I did now... maybe?
True is that I just wanted to bring the topic up for discussion, but was not imagining going that far... Anyway, Scammers trying to shut down other scammers? HK probably (like China) understand the real value of Bitcoin. US doesn't look a smart mover from oversea. But who knows, maybe it will surprise us all again.
enjoy & keep watching
🍿
reply