Merged Bitcoin - Part 3

[psionl0]

Here is an eyepopping article to illustrate something quite immoral.

The site chosen for the mining operation spans more than 100 acres. When completed, it will not only be the largest Bitcoin mining facility on the planet, but also the largest single data centre in North America.

https://www.newsbtc.com/2019/11/18/...ge-to-work-on-worlds-biggest-mining-facility/

Maybe you just don't realize it but that article is providing an argument against your notion that "the nonsense is disintegrating in beautiful fashion".

 

[psionl0]

While technically Bitcoin is an asset bubble, what do you call an 'asset' that was created from nothing to make obscene profit for its inventor, and only increases in 'value' due to new 'investors'?

And there we have it. The psychic programmer working in concert with the NWO to fleece gullible speculators. Another argument that is as old as the hills (or at least as old as the original bitcoin thread).

'Satoshi Nakamoto' looked into a crystal ball which told him that some random bit of computer code would net him millions - if not billions!

 

[Mycroft]

Why not?

There is a world of difference between an ill advised investment an a fraudulent scam run by a shonky operator.

I think you attribute to malice what is done in ignorance.

Bitcoin is not, by definition a Ponzi scheme in the same way a spider is not, but definition, an insect. At the same time, there is very little of value to be had by being a pedant and correcting anyone over it.

 

[psionl0]

I think you attribute to malice what is done in ignorance.

Bitcoin is not, by definition a Ponzi scheme in the same way a spider is not, but definition, an insect. At the same time, there is very little of value to be had by being a pedant and correcting anyone over it.

You seem to be arguing that bitcoin IS a fraudulent scam run by a shonky operator but the name of that scam is not "Ponzi".

Am I supposed to attribute that piece of ridiculous nonsense to malice or ignorance?

Bitcoin is just a digital commodity. Nobody is "running" it. There may be scams that involve bitcoin (just as there are with currencies) but by definition, an inanimate object (even a digital one) can't scam anybody.

 

[psionl0]

The psychic programmer working in concert with the NWO to fleece gullible speculators.

For those who came in late, any notion that bitcoin was "created from nothing to make obscene profit for its inventor" is completely at odds with history.

The person known as Satoshi Nakamoto originally put the code and blockchain in the public domain so that it could be evaluated. It was his solution to the "Byzantine Generals" problem (ensuring that on line data isn't corrupted by hostile forces). He may have "mined" a large number of bitcoins for himself but this was long before you needed banks of super computers to do so. He wasn't trying to enrich himself. He was just a computer geek.

In those early days, bitcoin was literally worth nothing. One holder paid 10,000 BTC for a pizza. It was an exercise that showed how bitcoin could be used as a currency to pay for things. Another "early adopter" offered to sell 10,000 BTC online for $50.00 and couldn't get any takers.

It would be years before speculators swooped in and bid up the price of bitcoin and nobody predicted it.

 

[Samson]

I would buy bitcoin at 7253 now for a lazy $1000, stop at 6500.
I hate posting this but heh, the planet is burning regardless

 

[psionl0]

I am pretty certain that selling right here at 7205 will reap extravagant rewards. the stop loss is tight at 7388.

I would buy bitcoin at 7253 now for a lazy $1000, stop at 6500.

You missed the mark by 24 hours. The low point was yesterday when the price was $6500. Now you are recommending a buy when the price is peaking again.

Clearly, you are trying to punish bitcoin speculators.

 

[Tolls]

Bitcoin is just a digital commodity. Nobody is "running" it. There may be scams that involve bitcoin (just as there are with currencies) but by definition, an inanimate object (even a digital one) can't scam anybody.

Quite.
Just compare it to something like OneCoin to see the difference.

 

[Samson]

What I find really difficult to post is that the TA I considered predictive had not had a consumated pattern.
I no longer expect a 1k rally.
Cancell and reverse at 7084. Go short right now.

 

[psionl0]

Quite.
Just compare it to something like OneCoin to see the difference.

You are right. Bitcoin and OneCoin are nothing alike. They are "chalk and cheese". OneCoin didn't even have a blockchain. The only thing they had was an sql server with a database.

The only similarity is that OneCoin itself didn't run a scam. Instead, it was a shonky operator running the scam based on a fake product.
https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-50435014

 

[Mycroft]

You seem to be arguing that bitcoin IS a fraudulent scam run by a shonky operator but the name of that scam is not "Ponzi".

No, you're reading that into my words.

Am I supposed to attribute that piece of ridiculous nonsense to malice or ignorance?

Neither.

Bitcoin is just a digital commodity. Nobody is "running" it. There may be scams that involve bitcoin (just as there are with currencies) but by definition, an inanimate object (even a digital one) can't scam anybody.

I don't disagree with any of that, but for the average person I don't think it's terribly important to make the distinction between "scam" and "very bad investment for the novice investor that carries very high risk."

To go back to the spider/insect analogy, if someone expresses the opinion that spiders are icky, nothing of value is gained by arguing them down and making sure they understand how valuable spiders are to the ecosystem and making sure they understand spiders are not insects. While that's all true, they will still think spiders are icky.

 

[psionl0]

I don't think it's terribly important to make the distinction between "scam" and "very bad investment for the novice investor that carries very high risk."

It IS you know. Words like "scam", ""ponzi", "pyramid" etc are emotionally charged words designed to make people negative about bitcoin regardless of the facts. It implies that somebody is running the whole thing. You can't say that any argument is ok as long as it is against bitcoin.

If you are going to post about bitcoin then you must tell the truth. The truth is that bitcoin is a risky investment. It doesn't mean that everybody who buys any is going to lose and it doesn't mean an inevitable fall to zero. That is what the emotional arguments are trying to get people believe regardless of the facts.

 

[Belz...]

It IS you know. Words like "scam", ""ponzi", "pyramid" etc are emotionally charged words designed to make people negative about bitcoin regardless of the facts.

The fact is that BTC is unreliable and pretty much useless. So what else is there to say? Yeah, it's not a ponzi scheme. It might be a scam, it might not. But that's irrelevant now.

 

[GlennB]

What I find really difficult to post is that the TA I considered predictive had not had a consumated pattern.
I no longer expect a 1k rally.
Cancell and reverse at 7084. Go short right now.

You're making me dizzy.

 

[Mycroft]

It IS you know. Words like "scam", ""ponzi", "pyramid" etc are emotionally charged words designed to make people negative about bitcoin regardless of the facts.

Which would be of great concern if we were talking about people, not such a big deal when talking about an abstraction.

You can't say that any argument is ok as long as it is against bitcoin.

I'm not saying that.

I'm saying it's not a big deal if people who already don't like Bitcoin aren't perfect in how they articulate why they don't like it. Yes, it is neither a Ponzi scheme nor a pyramid scheme, but the damage done by someone incorrectly labeling it as such is about the same as the damage done by someone who incorrectly labels a spider as an insect.

If you are going to post about bitcoin then you must tell the truth.

This is clearly very important to you. But why? How are you harmed?

The truth is that bitcoin is a risky investment. It doesn't mean that everybody who buys any is going to lose and it doesn't mean an inevitable fall to zero. That is what the emotional arguments are trying to get people believe regardless of the facts.

All of which are important only if you're invested in getting people to buy bitcoin.

 

[psionl0]

This is clearly very important to you. But why? How are you harmed?

Because only an idiot would use the wrong argument against something.

If I said that power points were dangerous because they were full of evil spirits instead of high voltage electricity you would be the first person to condemn me as ignorant.

"Any argument will do as long as it is against bitcoin" is the antithesis of critical thinking.

 

[psionl0]

It might be a scam, it might not. But that's irrelevant now.

On the contrary. It is very relevant - to you.

Why? Because "bitcoin is risky" doesn't sound bad enough for you. OTOH allow people to think that it is a scam then suddenly it becomes a new ball game. So **** the facts!

 

[Mycroft]

Because only an idiot would use the wrong argument against something.

Maybe. One exception could be that it were of trivial importance and not worth arguing over.

If I said that power points were dangerous because they were full of evil spirits instead of high voltage electricity you would be the first person to condemn me as ignorant.

A distinction of tremendous importance to someone tasked with installing, maintaining and repairing this equipment. Not so important if your only concern was that someone, such as a child, not mess with it.

"Any argument will do as long as it is against bitcoin" is the antithesis of critical thinking.

Again, not what I'm saying.

 

[psionl0]

A distinction of tremendous importance to someone tasked with installing, maintaining and repairing this equipment. Not so important if your only concern was that someone, such as a child, not mess with it.

The same principle applies to crypto currencies. It is of critical importance whether the crypto is being maintained by a person or by a system that renders the records immutable. (See OneCoin above).

Again, not what I'm saying.

That's exactly what you are saying.

You say "trivial importance" because you want everybody to believe that bitcoin is as bad as a ponzi scheme. If they believe that it is a ponzi scheme then that is even better for you.

 

[lomiller]

On

Why? Because "bitcoin is risky" doesn't sound bad enough for you.

Risk is usually associated with high levels of variability, which isn’t the problem people have with bitcoin.