BITCOIN

Zola.

Section62 said:

Zola. said:

If you say so. Those who argue against bitcoin the most are typically the older generation who are set in their  ways and don't like technological change. 

Ps i genuinely don't care to convince anyone nor do i intend to offend. Just stating my no filter opinion. 

Merry Christmas 

How do you know? Particularly on a forum like this where there is no indication of how old individual posters are?

All you have to go on is what they write.

It's also a myth that the 'older generation' don't like technological change.  Some older people don't like change, just as some younger people don't either.  These 'older' people have lived through and embraced technological change every bit as challenging as technologies such as crypto.

Bros who resort to dismissing other people's views on the basis of ageism don't do their case any good.

If you watch any of the vocal anti-Bitcoin debates on Youtube etc, the vast majority of them are 60+... old bankers, politicians, gold bugs etc. Mostly the ones who shout the loudest have something to lose. Like many of the politicians who are in bed with the banks etc. 

I am not ageist in the slightest by the way  - there are many people who do understand it and see the value also. 

Section62

adindas said:

Section62 said:

However, your argument is effectively that we should believe people like you copy/pasting pro-crypto information, but ignore anything else.  Can you not see the problem with that?

Sorry, but when did I ever ask people to believe me, any link? In fact, in many of my posts, I have said this. “Do your own DDs”.

When you post on this forum it is implicit that you are expecting people to believe you... unless the post is clearly intended as humour rather than fact.

In any case, I said "people like you", since you aren't the only one posting pro-crypto information.

But that doesn't alter the apparent flaw in your logic.

Section62

Zola. said:

If you watch any of the vocal anti-Bitcoin debates on Youtube etc, the vast majority of them are 60+... old bankers, politicians, gold bugs etc. Mostly the ones who shout the loudest have something to lose. Like many of the politicians who are in bed with the banks etc. 

I'd suggest that may well reflect the self-selection amongst people with the desire to rant on Youtube etc, rather than a true distribution of people's views on crypto distributed across different age groups.  We'd need a more robust methodology to find out for sure.

There's also a difference between people who are "set in their ways and don't like technological change" and people who "have something to lose".  E.g. being invested in old tech is a reason to do crypto down, but it doesn't automatically go hand in hand with not liking technological change.

bugbyte_2

Happy Christmas!

Genuine question - If cost and speed of transaction are a plus for bitcoin as implied by the comments about vampire banks, how come it has cost between $1.78 and $62 for each transaction this year? Secondly, if Bitcoin is adapted as  everyone's go to currency, will it have to have the same anti money laundering checks which society deem necessary?

Scottex99

lozzy1965 said:

Yes, a bit of a nonsensical statement in my opinion.  The 'value' of all money is zero if it hasn't been accepted as a method of payment for goods and services!  It's the acceptance that gives it value.  It's another argument as to whether bitcoin (as this is what this thread is about) will become accepted enough to have true value.
EDIT:  Scottex - It's true to say we don't know Bitcoin's value yet surely?

No we don't know. I have no clue in the short term either. If I did I'd be selling every top and buying every dip on 100x leverage and have many islands already.

I think you can make some good valid points for long term plays though, all of them have been made here a few times. I'll be long for years now for sure.

Inflation hedge, hard money, control your own wealth etc etc

Scottex99

Ha ha I caught the first vid.  I liked that one

Merry Christmas to ALL who post here, very interesting discussions on both sides and lots of help given out too.  Now if you'll excuse me I need to go and get some cash out of a machine for Christmas

Agreed, for the most part, it can be a good discussion, although a lot of the same points keep getting made on both sides. I think this will be an epic thread to look back on in around 2025/6, especially after the next halving. I hope MSE doesn't burn this thread... I am sure there will be lots to discuss between now and then and if we keep it going it'll be funny to see how opinions change...

Have a nice Christmas all !!
Not too early to open a bottle of red is it?

Will be a great read for sure. Many told you so's to come... but from what side? 

Zola.

bugbyte_2 said:

Happy Christmas!

Genuine question - If cost and speed of transaction are a plus for bitcoin as implied by the comments about vampire banks, how come it has cost between $1.78 and $62 for each transaction this year? Secondly, if Bitcoin is adapted as  everyone's go to currency, will it have to have the same anti money laundering checks which society deem necessary?

Those would be transactions on the 'slow' base layer. 

Transactions on the Lightning network (a layer two solution) , which would be used for the likes of everyday purchases are thousands of a penny in transaction fees per transaction. 

[Deleted User]

Merry Christmas everyone,

Over the last couple of months, I was reading entire thread from the beginning for never-ending amusement.

annabanana82 said:

I hope no real opinion on BTC, but I don't feel I've missed the boat and have no regrets on not holding any.

(that's a good one!) How knowing that you missed the boat (by thousands of percent) makes you fell that you didn't missed it? That's beyond me.

My condolences.😭😂

Scottex99

bugbyte_2 said:

Happy Christmas!

Genuine question - If cost and speed of transaction are a plus for bitcoin as implied by the comments about vampire banks, how come it has cost between $1.78 and $62 for each transaction this year? Secondly, if Bitcoin is adapted as  everyone's go to currency, will it have to have the same anti money laundering checks which society deem necessary?

Costs changes depending on how busy the network is but it's not related to the USD size of the transfer you are doing. 

I just moved 0.35 BTC from a wallet app to an exchange and paid 0.0005 BTC for the fee. Approx 20 quid. I could have moved 100.35 BTC and it would have been the same fee. (in this case determined by the app and they'll have set it high enough to cover their network cost, in general).

There is no KYC or AML for BTC. It's decentralised. I could have moved that 0.35 BTC to any of millions of wallets in the world and nobody can stop me. There is however checks, regs, tax etc to consider if/when you off ramp those coins into fiat and try to credit the money to your bank

eskbanker

Scottex99 said:

There is no KYC or AML for BTC. It's decentralised. I could have moved that 0.35 BTC to any of millions of wallets in the world and nobody can stop me. There is however checks, regs, tax etc to consider if/when you off ramp those coins into fiat and try to credit the money to your bank

The decentralisation and lack of control are obviously often cited as advantages of the technology and its implementation, but in the specific context of adoption as an actual currency, the prospect of recipients inadvertently being on the wrong end of the proceeds of crime surely has to be a negative factor?  Maybe that isn't a significant issue in El Salvador, but I'd have thought it would hinder acceptability in more developed economies....