Quote from: TheNewAnon135246 on February 01, 2020, 07:25:57 AM

Quote from: antikvark on February 01, 2020, 05:01:00 AM

Quote from: DannyHamilton on January 31, 2020, 10:21:12 PM

Quote from: antikvark on January 23, 2020, 07:00:43 PM

In Ponzi, the payment is possible only from funds of other investors. In bitcoin also. And that's the point.

In ALL TRANSACTIONS, payment is only possible from funds of someone else paying you. That's the DEFINITION OF A FINANCIAL TRANSACTION.

You seem to like to say:

"Look, someone paid someone, in a Ponzi people pay people, therefore it is a Ponzi!"

Then when someone points out that there are lots of reasons that people pay people, and that they are not all Ponzi, you respond with:

"Those examples are beside the point. In those examples, someone paid someone and since they were paid it's ok. But in Bitcoin someone pays someone, and in Ponzi someone pays someone, therefore Bitcoin is a Ponzi!"

It's circular nonsense that carries no meaning. Yes, in a scam, a person is convinced to give another person something of value. That is NOT what makes it a scam. People give other people things of value all the time in situations that are not a scam. Until you can understand this, you aren't going to get anywhere in this conversation.

Quote from: antikvark on January 23, 2020, 07:00:43 PM

What matters is that its holders are not paid by the issuers

One cannot be paid by someone that does not exist. What matters is that holders should not expect to be paid by anyone for holding. It is not an "investment" into a business. It does not pay "dividends" or "interest". It is inflationary money that will eventually become deflationary.

Quote from: antikvark on January 23, 2020, 07:00:43 PM

like in all legitimate investments, but by other bitcoin investors, like in Ponzi schemes.

There you go saying words again that don't make sense, and that are contradictory.

You must educate yourself about basic economic concepts.

When an instrument issuer pays divided, interest, principal or non-monetary value to an instrument holder this is not market transaction but the fulfilment of issuer's obligation.

On the other hand, market transaction is an instance of buying or selling something.

Finally, Ponzi-like is when you invest funds into some project or instrument that pays returns not from project's activity or funds of the instrument issuer, but from the funds of new investors. Bitcoin perfectly fits that definition.

Fidelity, a company with $2,460,000,000,000 under its management, seems to disagree: https://unchained-capital.com/blog/bitcoin-obsoletes-all-other-money/ (tweeted here: https://twitter.com/DigitalAssets/status/1223306849275076608?s=19)

You are horribly failing at what you're doing. No sure what your agenda is but you should consider.to stop wasting your time and go do something else.

Fidelity cannot change facts. The fact is that Bitcoin issuers pay nothing to Bitcon holders. The fact is also that the real value of a financial instrument is in a direct causal relationship with payment. The more an instrument issuer pays the higher the instrument's real value will be. And vice versa, the less it pays the lower the instrument's real value will be. If it pays zero the instrument's real value is zero. Whatever Fidelity does, won't change this casual relationship. This relationship is factual, empirical - you can observe it at every instance of economic reality.