Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 08:30:06 PM

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 07:23:59 PM

Quote from: Soft Crem on Today at 06:41:31 PM

In order to increase the use of Bitcoin users, Bitcoin and its saviors need to be more aware and give proper advice on how to increase the use of Bitcoin. Benefits of Bitcoin must be confirmed. This can increase the number of Bitcoin users.

El Salvador passed a law in their country basically forcing Bitcoin down people's throats and yet they still aren't adopting it. What more do you want?

Some folks were helped by El Salvador's passage of their bitcoin as legal tender law that went into effect in August 2021. Some people choose not to get involved in bitcoin. The law could be read as a forcing, as you suggest, yet I doubt that you are even close to giving any kind of genuine and/or accurate reading of what the law was allegedly forcing. You may well need to back up your claim a wee bit moar better.

El Salvador passed a law forcing the government there to promote Bitcoin using compelled taxpayer money. Today, Bitcoin's price completely revolves around what the US president says about it on any given day. So much for Bitcoin being some kind of hedge against governments

.

*Note: By the way, I added a footnote to my above post after my earlier post and by the time I read this (your) responsive post.

Sounds like you are spinning what you want to see in the world rather than really attempting to grapple with reality.

Yes.. leaders of governments have been elected by the people and they have discretion regarding how to spend public (tax payer) money, and also discretion regarding various ways to deploy government resources, how to communicate ideas or policies or plans, and not everyone is going to agree with what various governments (or their leaders) are doing, and even sometimes some governments do not represent the interest of the people very well.

Sure there could be governments attempting to pump or dump bitcoin, and whether that is helpful to bitcoin or constitutes an attack on bitcoin remains quite difficult to figure out in advance. Even if you are perceiving governments to be controlling bitcoin, I doubt that you are characterizing the actual situation of what we actually have going on in the world today (in regards to bitcoin) in a way that really helps to better understand and/or appreciating how bitcoin currently fits in the world and in world politics, and surely the fact that ongoing bitcoin adoption means that friends and enemies (and really everyone) will likely sooner or later end up getting into bitcoin or being touched by bitcoin-related matters. Bitcoin continues to be adopted and to advance and network effects continue to grow.. as I already mentioned above, even if you want to characterize the growth of bitcoin as if it were merely being promoted by a few fringe governmental players who are supposedly gaining control over bitcoin and over bitcoiners (or whatever it is that you are trying to suggest to be happening from your ongoingly deluded and seemingly out-of-touch perspective).

Whether any of us like the direction of various governmental responses, policies or connections to bitcoin or not seems to be a bit of a side point, and surely on an individual level we can choose to fight bitcoin, support bitcoin or try to stay away from bitcoin or to promote our own shitcoin, and surely each of us have choices that we make in regards to whether to allocate any time, energies and value into bitcoin and if so then how to go about such allocation into bitcoin if we were to go down that path.

Even if there seems to be a lot of current bitcoin hype, not everyone is acting on the hype that they are witnessing, even though the BTC price seems to currently be experiencing a lot of UPpity price pressures (as I type this post, and in the past week, too), and there seems to be a considerable amount of hype around Trump's swearing in to office within about 19 hours (noon eastern time), and there is anticipation regarding a large number of executive orders that he has pre-announced, so there are likely good reasons for BTC prices to be moving a lot in anticipation, yet we still would not necessarily know if the BTC price will continue to pump or if it might dump, so short-term BTC price movements can be quite difficult to figure out, even though surely we can see a lot of buzz (and hype) going in recent days and perhaps lasting through this coming week, whether BTC prices end up fluctuating a lot or not is still to be seen, yet I personally try not to play any of these kinds of hype scenarios in terms of my own BTC portfolio management and other investments that I have.

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 08:30:06 PM

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 07:23:59 PM

Bitcoin is not going to increase in the number of users, it will decrease.

How is that? I think that the data shows that with the passage of time, bitcoin has been increasing in all of its various network effects (those outlined by Trace Mayer) including more users, so why expect that bitcoin adoption is not going to continue to increase into the future.

I agree it has grown, but I think new products are only just starting to take hold.

You sound like a marketer, and sure maybe you are correct and maybe not. I personally believe it is way better to figure out some kind of a bitcoin plan (and to execute it) instead of getting distracted into supposedly new products that you believe are the next best thing.. blah blah blah. I imagine that your own product (shitcoin) is in the mix of "great" products that you consider to be better than sliced bread (and bitcoin too).

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

This market is still new, but the direction seems pretty clear to me. When a market leader like Bitcoin actually loses traction against competitors, it's time to wonder why. When you investigate and find those competitors have far superior products in every way--except for the present-day market cap--then the trend seems very likely to continue.

Good luck with those dumb-ass ideas. I have heard them over and over and over through the years in regards to various shitcoin pumping talking points...and frequently they come out at fairly interesting times to distract innocent folks from their bitcoin.. which yeah, too bad and so sad that people fall for these ongoing baloney talking points and end up with less bitcoin than they should have had if they had remained focused on bitcoin accumulation and/or bitcoin holding.

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

Imagine saying, in about 1986, that General Motors will always be the biggest company in the world because... they are the biggest company in the world. The biggest one always always stays the biggest, they said.

Well, that's not always the case. Perhaps this is why Bitcoiners are now trying to get governments to use force and compel citizens to stop using other products--because they are losing in the free market.

Bitcoin is a protocol not a company, and to me it seems that governments, institutions, rich people are coming to bitcoin rather than bitcoin going to them.. It is not like bitcoiners have a choice regarding who comes to bitcoin, including that any of us holding bitcoin for a long time are likely going to have to suffer through these newbies pumping the fuck out of our bags, and hoping that we do not get too distracted away from the power of bitcoin that comes from self-custody, open source-ness, and various ways to transact directly and without third parties. There are probably other aspects of bitcoin, and surely running a node and mining are important too, so hopefully those can continue throughout the world and in ways that are not overly centralizing -even though so many big companies and governments are getting involved with mining and node running too.

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

(That said, what most Bitcoiners missed about the 2024 US elections is that the major donors, under the guise of "Bitcoin", were actually brokers and non-Bitcoin makers who have a financial interest in hawking their own products over Bitcoin: the actually Bitcoin community just get conned, I think

).

Sure.. Trump has a lot of shitcoiner ideas, and a decent number of shitcoiners around him, so it could be interesting to see the extent to which shitcoining and/or bitcoining comes out through whatever governmental acts might be communicated and/or put into policy or even proposed as legislation rather than executive actions in the coming week and even further out in the first few months of the administration.. and surely there will also be battles going on in government too.. It is not like Trump has any abilities to not be controversial or even to end up fucking things up more than he helps... but who knows? I am not going to proclaim to know, even though surely there remains anticipation to attempt to match up differences in regards to what is being said and what is being done, which surely could result in pumps or dumps and those pumps/dumps might affect other coins or crypto projects besides bitcoin.

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 08:30:06 PM

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 07:23:59 PM

Maybe richer people will buy up more of it and make the price go up, and maybe more governments* will help prop up the price, but there will be fewer and fewer individuals in the future actually holding Bitcoin because there are far better products out there now. Bitcoin is too slow and too expensive to be used for mainstream transactions by ordinary people.

(*And the irony that Bitcoin needs government help to support it's price now is pretty intense

).

Sure it is true that Bigger and BIGGER players are focusing on accumulating bitcoin, and they also seem to be gobbling it up too... which logically seems to imply that fewer individuals are going to be able to have as much of it, and even if the same quantity of people are able to have bitcoin, then the fact that BIGGER players are gobbling up a lot of the bitcoin, then that likely means that the smaller players would not be able to have as much of the bitcoin, proportionately speaking..

You see, your only interest--which is the same as most current owners of Bitcoin--is that Bitcoin goes up in price so you are richer. That is very natural.

You are making a strawman. The mere fact that I am pointing to BTC price movements does not mean that I am interested in that, even though I am talking about it as a factual matter.

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

Hence the only thing you are concerned about is more rich people buying more of the asset you hold. But this is a very narrow focus, I think.

The only thing that I am concerned about? How would you know that? Sure I have a lot of posts out there, but so what.

Frequently I attempt to describe matters in terms of "is" rather than "ought"

So if I am talking about what "is" or what I believe "might happen," that does not necessarily signify that I am talking about what I want to happen or what I prefer to happen.

You seem to be making shit up when you are proclaiming what I want based on what I said about what happened, what is happening or what might happen.

Also, frequently I suggest people get bitcoin based on what is happening rather than what I believe ought to happen. In the end, people can choose for themselves, and they will be responsible for the consequences of their choices..

Quote from: legiteum on Today at 08:49:22 PM

Imagine shareholders of a public company telling the CEO, "just get the stock price up right now and ignore everything else". That will work great... until it doesn't.

In the long run, the winner of the digital currency wars will be the product(s) with the most individual users. There's no way that ends up being Bitcoin since it simply doesn't scale.

I am glad that you have bitcoin-related matters figured out...or at least you believe that you do (to the extent that you are even being truthful in your ongoing nonsense.. it can be difficult to believe that you even believe your own ongoing nonsensical proclamations).

Anyhow, perhaps I am hopeful that not too many people choose to follow your likely-to-be-wrong proclamations about the future of bitcoin or the likely need for an overwhelming number of normies to get started in bitcoin earlier rather than later.. for their own good... but yeah, sure, there are going to continue to be no coiners and low coiners who do not protect themselves and they fail/refuse to accumulate bitcoin and/or to hold it. In the end, people can choose for themselves, and it is their choice how to allocate their time, energy and finances and whether that includes bitcoin in the mix or not.