Quote from: BitChick on February 18, 2014, 05:58:38 PM

Quote from: salstimda on February 18, 2014, 05:53:15 PM

Quote from: BitChick on February 18, 2014, 05:49:30 PM

Quote from: salstimda on February 18, 2014, 05:46:15 PM

Quote from: cdooer on February 18, 2014, 05:37:58 PM

Quote from: BitChick on February 18, 2014, 05:25:56 PM

To be specific, I was writing that "almost everyone" in America, or any developed country has access to Bitcoin. I understand that with a global mindset that Bitcoin is NOT accessible to most of the world easily. However, that could and will hopefully change at some point. Bitcoin could be helpful for places where banking is not easily accessible for them. Hopefully, at some point, all that will be needed is cell phones.

Probably time to stop feeding the troll, otherwise you'll be here all day with his "well what about this, and what about that" bullshit.

Oh, someone has a different opinion than you do? Must be a troll. Turn on Ignore-Mode! *LALALALALALALALA*

in all seriousness, i don't see the point in providing banking for people who can't even afford food. please explain to me.

Trolls need food before they can afford BTC. Grin

Oh. That wasn't serious. Wink

Andreas Antonopolous talks about the opportunity for "banking" services opening up doors for the 3rd World in many of his talks. He is quite passionate about it and it is one the main reasons he is excited about BTC. Google him. I can't do his explanations justice.

I know this guy, I have watched a few youtube videos of him already and read an article or two, and he seems like a very smart guy to me, i wouldn't argue against that. But im not gonna google to find some alleged arguments that he made for the sake of this discussion...you have to realize this is a bit ridiculous. either post the argument here, or let it be.

It is hard to solve the banking problems of the 3rd world in a sentence or two. Sorry about that. Wink

Hence why I am trying to bow out gracefully, knowing the subject matter is beyond me.

I remember a few arguments he made alongside "people save fees if they send money back home to their families" and something like people could use cellphones and sms for obtaining bitcoins and so on, but this all just affects people who already are doing well enough to afford a cellphone and its fees, and of course all food and shelter, or they probably wouldn't get a cellphone. So it's not really about the majority of people who are starving. that was my point - maybe in some circumstances it would help some people, but i don't really see any great solutions of big problems there...but of course i might have missed something. im far from beeing an expert on this topic aswell.