pull down to refresh

It's the beauty of Bitcoin, it's permission-less and you can't prevent others to use it the way they want if they're ready to pay the fees.
Yes Bitcoin is permissionless but a soft fork like Taproot is not Bitcoin. It is a soft fork.
reply
5 sats \ 2 replies \ @ama 9 Dec
You don't know neither what a soft fork nor what taproot are, do you?
reply
Taproot is a soft fork of Bitcoin.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ama 9 Dec
Therefore BTC in taproot addresses is BTC.
reply
unpopular but truthful.
reply
It doesn't make any sense though.
Why buy... nfts that look like a 6-year-old scribbled with Microsoft Paint offhand? What's the appeal? Where's the sovereignty and decentralization?
And aren't the people involved with this constantly losing money either 1) making them or 2) buying them, trading real bitcoin for a 3rd-party database tracking op_return outputs?
reply
can lead a horse to water, something like that.
reply
true, but they have to run out of money eventually
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ama 9 Dec
Assuming they don't make any with the assets they create.
reply
That's like saying 'assuming they don't make money playing the roulette table at the casino'
That's beside the point. If there was any money to be made, ethically, predictably, with casino games they would not exist. Casino games and casinos in general do not exist to 'make people money' playing the games.
They exist to siphon funds away from impatient idiots... and send them direct to the people who market and set the games up. The CASINOS.
At least casinos are regulated. 'Crypto' isn't and in my opinion should be kicked out of the United States.
(Bitcoin /= Crypto by all common definitions and does not fall under this at all)
reply