Re: Bitcoins are Not Real Or how People Blindly Believe Nakamoto's Nonsense

Numbers can be displayed on my mobile phone screen, not electronic coins that people call bitcoins

Only if you can believe in your fiat digits reflecting the units of your assets on your mobile through alert and same way you can deem fot by going to the bank or bitcoin ATM or p2p to claim those digits into fiat cash that you spend daily, then i see no reason why you should doubt on the digital version of currency that is more improved and decentralized than fiat to be a unit of your account, whereby you can convert your stash or bitcoins into fiat, withdraw it, make use of p2p, and have every digital units of coins from your wallet into a currency you can spend anywhere any time, then why not save yourself the unnecessary stress and give am attempts first and dee if it's monetized or not.

Yeah, that's a classical bitcoin propaganda and language manipulation that is used to lure people into believing bitcoins are real.

You literally ignored everything in the OP, and just repeat the propaganda. Pretty pathetic.

And here you have practiced two textbook examples of a propagandist:

1. Keep repeating a lie, "bitcoins aren't real", and hoping it sticks and that some will believe the BS.

2. "Accusation in a Mirror", as a quote taken from the French psychologist's 1970 book on the topic:

Quote

imputing to the adversaries the intentions that one has oneself and/or the action that you are in the process of enacting

That is, you are the one using "language manipulation" to lure people into believe an untruth, and yet you blame others for such actions.

... except that, as you can see, no one here is falling for it.

You know, the same as I, and the same as everyone else who read the OP, that bitcoins don't exist. There's no person on Earth that saw anything else in their wallet but numbers. The whole system, on the other hand, just stores data from which those numbers are calculated. So factually, there are no electronic coins called bitcoins. There's nothing in the ownership of number holders that would be counted with that numers.

So, why are you lying? What are you trying to achieve?

Bro' stop trash talking. Saying BTC doesn't exist is like saying the value that we all agree is stored in the material of & markings on a $100 bill doesn't exist, because nobody can locate this arrangement physically.

Bitcoins are blocks of encrypted information. The physical wallets we may use to send or receive this information, which represents an agreed upon storage of value for exchanging almost any other goods & services, only record transaction information. The fact that BTC does not occupy any more physical space, unless you print off paper wallets which some do, is part of its strength. It is evidence of the streamlining of the commercial currency exchange process. Pieces of paper & metal with markings on them that say this tender is representative of X amount of value because such & such an enforcement agency or government say so doesn't make coins or notes any more stable a form of currency than Bitcoin, which is a decentralized cryptocurrency with a proven track record of success as functional currency in the real world, for private individuals, huge exchanges, & traditional investors alike. If your country gets invaded or experiences some other more incremental catastrophe that destroys its economy, and your currency is suddenly rendered obsolete, you have nowhere to go. That is never going to happen to BTC because it is protected by the exponential growth in computer power & universal enfranchisement of using the internet. The majority have too much invested in these things to allow that economy to implode. Consensus wins, democracy wins. Not ancient Greek democracy or modern Greek democracy, but the universal ethical ideal of reason & transparency & faith in the long-held conviction of a majority.

Hahaha. A block contains data about sender, receiver and a number sent or received. This number is supposed to count coins, that is bitcoins. But no one has those coins. No one ever saw them.

Regarding those blocks and chains of blocks, anyone can download a copy of the blockchain, and it can be inspected to trace the path of numbers sent from one sender to another. So, you defined bitcoin as something that everyone can download for free. Hilarious.

The rest of your text is propaganda mixed with pure nonsense. You cannot protect something that doesn't exist. What you protect are numbers next to addresses. But why would anyone protect math abstractions that can be created in everyone's mind in an instant and used for whatever purposes? It's stupidity never seen before.

Stop talking air biscuits you subatomic troll-virus.

Cash is an agreement, it always only existed in the minds of capitalists. You might pretend you are a communist agitator, but as is most often the case with these things, you're more likely some frustrated kid airing his grievances through pseudo intellectual ranting.

I never said anything of the sort. The source-codes & the blockchain can be downloaded for free, not that I actually mentioned this.

A bitcoin itself is a symbol of mathematical computation, it is a proof-of-work electronically protected by codes that you obviously cannot get your head around. So what?

The wallet does not store Bitcoins, because the wallet only records information about transactions, which I suggest you look into a little more before your 'hahaha that makes no sense to a dumb shit like me so how could it make any sense at all' responses.

It is an agreement between traders. We never needed paper or coinage for anything but the storage of value that we ascribe to things and agree to conform to for the sake of transparent economy & ease of trade. Now, we have the advancing AI of modern computers to store this symbolic value for us, which is much more efficient, & doesn't need the fallible & fickle consent of bankers or their spotty sons & that means you Wink

Nakamoto in the their Whitepaper defined "coin", that you people call "bitcoin" in this way: "chain of digital signatures". And you people, here on this forum, have your own personal definitions. Every person that responded to my post, gave me different definition. You're basically fantasizing. What is that telling you? That the whole thing is one big joke. That's the reason you are pissed off and why you insult people that are just telling you plain snd simple truth.

Let's take Nakamoto's definition. If Steve has 1 BTC in wallet, and Ema 100 BTC, that would mean that Ema has 100 times more "chains of digital signatures" than the Steve. What does that even mean? It's a complete nonsense. Chain of digital signatures is stored on blockchain. And everyone can download it for free. Se, essentially, according to Nakamoto, Ema spent 2 million dollars in order bought something that is available for free to everyone. That's craziness never seen in human history. Wallet applications are informing you that you own xx units of a thing that you can download for free.