- Too many people who are "in" Bitcoin are in it for the number-go-up. Rather than for the freedom-go-up. NGU and FGU don't have to be mutually exclusive in fact NGU can make FGU better and more sustainable...
But freedom is freedom and the freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of 'your voice' is worth more long-term than any amount of money.
- Bitcoin is what we make of it, it's how we use it. Bitcoin is succeeding as a store of value, as a "digital gold" replacement. But it is nowhere near accepted as a 'medium-of-exchange' nothing of the sort yet.
Influencers and social media posts claim that Bitcoin will "end fiat" and "destroy the fed" and the results?
Did global trade or payments just "stop" during this time period?
- Bitcoiners run nodes and hold their own keys. Everything else is noise. There is a place for ETFs and big financial institutions to use Coinbase or Blackrock for custodying their Bitcoin... they mostly have no choice.
But there is zero excuse for individuals not to run a node (any implementation) and transact through it. If you don't run a node or hold your own keys, your influence on "the network" goes from small to zero. What percentage of the social media 'voices' posting about Bitcoin don't even run a node, much less transact through it? Be cautious of the claims people make on the internet.
- Either pay up or shut up. Talk is cheap so show me the money.
People today claim how Bitcoin is 'replacing fiat' and is 'freedom-money' for all... so the fees on-chain would reflect that right?
Right now the 'going rate' is around 44 cents for a transaction... for a "freedom-payment". And with a maximum of 4000 L1 transactions per 10 minutes or ~ 6.6 per second for the whole world...
If Bitcoin were to truly 'replace fiat' the mempool would logically be swamped and transactions would be expensive. The idea of paying for coffees on L1 in this world is absurd. And therefore anyone who claims that Bitcoin has A) replaced fiat today or B) been adopted "for payments" is not telling you the truth.
Bitcoin on-chain usage today is basically free and a healthy fee-market in the future is one where transactions really compete for Blockspace through fees. If you want to transact pay up... the end.
- Bitcoin's Layer-1 privacy leaves much to be desired. CoinJoins and Lightning help significantly... but they are only tools and even with their usage the privacy on Bitcoin isn't perfect.
Anyone who has seriously used Bitcoin 'for payments' realizes immediately the limitations of Bitcoin's privacy... and the necessity of Coinjoins and Lightning. A transparent 'transaction-graph' ensures there is no 'funny-business' with regards to inflation and the total number of Bitcoin outstanding... but it is a tradeoff no question.
People who develop and support privacy tools we should support also, so ignore the morons who oppose this or don't recognize the limitations of privacy on-chain. Better tools and more support for them is truly needed.
- Individuals can utilize and support privacy tools (like Coinjoins) but large companies and institutions generally cannot.
Case in point - ProtonWallet
In this interview the founder of Proton Andy (also a theoretical physicist) talks up the new 'Proton-Wallet' and Proton's history with Bitcoin going all the way back to Wikileaks. When the credit card companies tried to 'censor' Proton's encryption-services, ProtonMail accepted Bitcoin both for payment and donations... and they will (according to Andy) again in the future if necessary.
In the new ProtonWallet (available for free to 80 million current Proton users) there is an implementation in development for Coinjoins native to the application. In other words, native to any Bitcoin sent or received through ProtonWallet (which is basically Bitcoin-for-Email).
Such an implementation (of ProtonWallet) would be a 'one-stop-shop' for sending, receiving, and anonymizing Bitcoin parallel to the use of premium, privacy-affording email and cloud storage.
But this implementation depends on the pressure from regulators and in part the results of the Samurai-Wallet case. The point being that in an ideal world... well-known organizations would be immune from pressure and influence from governments as to which software they support and why. But in reality there's more to it... including public perception, the influence of the courts and even accountants.
It is what it is and we do well to acknowledge it while supporting freedom-technology however we can.
- Bitcoin is A tool, but it is not THE tool. No-one 'goes into battle' with a single tool or strategy or weapon... and a suite of technologies is crucial for prosperity and freedom.
The cypherpunks knew that encrypted email, communications, and finally money together would make the internet a better place for Humans. Bitcoin may represent the 'money' part... but due to its limited L1 privacy and widespread KYC we need other tools as well. Encrypted communications, peer-to-peer networks, TOR, free open-source software, and widely available hardware and expertise make the 'cypherpunk' dream possible and recognizable to all.
Building your own computer, encrypting with PGP, downloading and using FOSS... transacting in Bitcoin etc these things can and should exist parallel to the Wall Street and mainstream-ization of Bitcoin.
BUT they are its heart and soul. The mouth-breathers and Number-Go-Up morons will never understand this and they aren't in-charge anyway.
The people transacting in Bitcoin running their own nodes are.
- Bitcoin will not suddenly make 'the rich' poor and 'the poor' rich. That's not how it works.
People with the time, money, and resources will still have all those things with or without Bitcoin. And although Bitcoin is better money and better savings for anyone with the time...
It's not going to flip the world on its head. The rough parts of town will still be rough, and the nice parts will still be nice. You'll just have more control over your money, your time, your life, and the future of your community and those around you. We all should want that even if the world does not fundamentally change.
- People who want Bitcoin 'to go up' are still pricing Bitcoin in US Dollars. If they think it's "going up" then why would they spend it? Herein lies the contradiction... and where the mouthbreathers have a point.
If Bitcoin is 'going up' there is incentive not to spend it but to save it. But if it is to be a medium-of-exchange then people have to exchange it or use it to buy things. So is it for savings, or spending?
[Controversy so don't get triggered]: I think Bitcoin (and most cryptocurrencies) aren't 'particularly' good currencies. But they make for great digital capital.
Capital (in short) has none of the downsides of Cash... but the upsides of everything else. Currencies = bad. Digital Capital = Great.
Only time will tell if I was right or wrong.
- Bitcoin is from first principles. Work hard, don't trade, don't speculate. The Heart and Soul of Bitcoin is Energy. Bitcoin will be fine. And JPEGS won't kill Bitcoin.
The rest is Noise. Good Luck and Good Night.