/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16310006
just encourage everyone to DCA

>>16310006
Beats me dude but I'm a believer with a substantial allocation I'm never selling and my wife understands this and why

Yeah, but who is allowed to sell first?

>>16310055

Yeah your wife told me about that earlier, pretty funny

If there isn't any market in which the "commodity" is sold - ever - then assigning some kind of price/value to it at all becomes incoherent.

>>16310055
Man, it's so easy to convince idiots to fall for boomer-tier cucking like this. You are the ideal bag holder in an industry made entirely on the concept of selling at a higher price, full of people telling others to buy and hold to give themselves a higher chance of selling at a profit at your expense.
Do you really believe in the cult of crypto "making a better world" bullshit? I have a shared office space startup to sell you, goy.

90% of crypto owners are autistic, antisocial, sociopathic, drug dealing, criminals. You think they care about you above having a counterparty to sell their easy money to?

adoption will continue to rise for sure. it takes alot of time though. just think about if everyone thought like this at the same time, hypothetically. if everyone would rush to buy in a short span of time alot of things would happen. it would create a bubble where supply would be stretched thin and prices would skyrocket = less people willing to buy, bubble pops. (unless whales coordinate pouring in liquidity enough time to supply the demand with enormous volume which is probably not realistic but still a possibility to a certain extent if you take into account all the bitcoin which is stashed in the top 100 wallets). after the bubble you have the bagholders, the fud, the bear market and everything else which most normies despise.

the network would probably bog down too. experience has shown that technology, regardless of how advanced it is will always have flaws in its current time of use. sure, tech is more developed than 10 years ago but the bugs will always be a fact of life and there is always the question of scalability of these massive systems if you want to keep the characteristic of real decentralization.

in the end money will always be money, surely we will have less central control which is good but the social side-effects of money itself as a means of exchange will always be present. what side effects? corruption for one.

it all takes time and we are all still relatively early in considering the state of things

>>16310169
>making a better world
lol no. But what you buying big guy?

>if nobody ever sold btc it would be worth infinity dollars.

>>16310073
>>16310113
>>16310169

These guys literally cannot comprehend the mechanism I am suggesting, and it's hilarious.

Here are a few words that you should Google the definition for, fellas:

>cyptography
>paradigm
>deflationary
&
>altruism

I'm sure you're already familiar with:

>selfishness
>backstabbing
>regression
&
>unfulfillment

>>16310006
its too late the kikes already created Paper BTC with the CME futures. They can now Print as much paper BTC as they want (and use it to short BTC ironically just like they did with gold). Satoshi Nakamo... I mean Vitalik (not satoshi) tried to prevent this from happening by adding smart contracts to BITCOIN however the kikes instantly saw this threat and took over BTC core with BlockStream. You see anon BTC adoption relies on people accepting it as a store value the only problem is people are retarded. Its only a matter of time until the kikes convince "the people" that their Paper BTC is as good as the real thing, and then Breton Woods 2.0 follows and the cycle repeats. ETH (and ironically LINK) are immune to this for they are currencies of the new machine2machine economy. The Kikes can print all the paper ETH/LINK they want but when they try to use it, the Network will simply say
> error: insufficient gas
machines arent retarded they know the real thing.

>>16310262
>Asks for reasons he might be wrong
>Gets reasons
>Gets upset, says "no u just dont get it man" and then literally types out a list of buzzwords to "look up" instead of articulating some kind of argument/point at all

>>16310240
you missed the part where
>This is how we eventually slay the '''market makers''' and force BTC as the universal reserve asset for all contemporary currencies (think stable coins); this scenario would literally be a financial revolution - wealth transference from the rich titty innovative the likes of which has never been seen before.

>>16310293
How do you not realise that your response was incoherent? I can demonstrate this by asking you a simple question, going to read your response again and then coming to read this question, genius:

>How much would "gold" be worth if there was a finite amount, that we had access to, that was incorruptible and had the potential to evolve alongside us over time?

>>16310290
that is why its good to hold on to your bitcoins to avoid having to deal with fiat bitcoins later on. trade only if you have a working plan and strategy which you know will work more often than not.

>>16310006
Who would they buy it from, dipshit?

>>16310358
>being late
>being the offspring of low-iq people unable to see where the future will take us
I know this may seem like segregation and a death sentence for the unintelligent, but they will in fact reap the benefits of an evolving society, as they will remain part of (unless they opt out for """"religious reasons"""").

>>16310344
>How much would "gold" be worth if there was a finite amount, that we had access to, that was incorruptible and had the potential to evolve alongside us over time?

What exactly is this supposed to change about the conversation? The fundamental question of the proposition you've advanced is literally:
>What would BTC be worth if there was no market for it whatsoever, and no chance there would ever be one?

The answer is nothing. A commodity with no market is nothing. Period. Retreating into vague corporate-speak like "evolve overtime alongside us over time" doesn't alter this fundamental reality.

>>16310466

The analogy stands, champ.
Unless you can show how it is incorrect.

You refused to answer the question I asked and instead built a straw man to knock down, pathetic.

>>16310466
Also, if you're too retarded to see that "reserve markets" are simply an evolutionary step in an endless chain, I'm sorry for you; please, try and expand your knowledge base and experience to beyond the tip of your nose.

>LITERALLY zero liquidity
>reserve currency

>>16310006
Who are you going to sell too? You'll be stuck holding literally a number on a screen that no one wants to buy

>>16310006
yes. I also predict a future market of negotiable % over spot like with gold coins, e.g., selling a mined 25 btc block from 2009 with 0 transactions on it will command huge premiums.

>>16310290
stfu about paper gold. it does a fantastic job of artificially deflating the price of gold. get on the train instead of complaining about (((financiers))) and trading penny stocks and altcoins.

>>16310567
>said everyone with a brokerage account ever

>>16310587
this already exists. they are called virgin bitcoins. zero transactions history on those bitcoins.

>>16310520
>The analogy stands, champ.
Stands for what? You literally did not communicate any connection between your "analogy" and the original hypothetical at all.

Communicating your half-baked ideas really badly and then screeching
>TFW TOO INTELLIGENT
when everybody in the thread starts calling you a retard doesn't make you right.

>straw man
YOU SAID, and I quote:
>BTC, without selling - ever
If a "commodity" stops being sold, the idea of naming a "price" for it, by definition, no longer makes sense.

You've got an underpants-gnome problem. Your plan is:
>1) Eliminate the market for BTC, rendering it inert and worthless
>2) ??????????????
>3) financial revolution

>>16310169
>Do you really believe in the cult of crypto "making a better world" bullshit?
Yes

>>16310604
>virgin bitcoins
oh shit really? because I was talking about this in 2013 when people started sending in their Casascius coins to get slabbed

>>16310652
casascius coins? physical bitcoins?

yeah, I dont know much about virgin bitcoins, read about them this year.

i hear cia likes those virgin bitcoins too. alot. they just love them.

>>16310678
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Casascius_physical_bitcoins

Casascius was the first major producer of physical bitcoins, basically brass rounds with a temper-evident seal over a private key

>>16310006
Reminder that there are literally zero (0) retailers that accept bitcoin and don't just use a USD conversion service like bitpay. Total penetration of BTC in the economy? Zero. Total amount of fiat displaced? Zero.Things were unironically further along during the silk road era.

>>16310437
You sure you clicked the right post, bud?

>>16310006
>if everyone just simply stopped being greedy we would have a revolution!
wow great find pal, why don't you start doing it and we will follow

>>16310724
this is normal at this point. bitcoin is just too volatile and there is too little money in it to keep it stable. it is still used though. it is superior to traditional remittance services with no borders. nobody can deny this because it simply is perfect for this.

there are so many uses when also considering smart contracts its just insane. it will never disappear. it will move though and adoption will take time and many bubbles and many dumps before merchants will considering hodling their money with it.

>>16310748
Yep, just double-checked.

>>16310620
("Null" is not the same as "worthless" is not the same as "0" is not the same as "infinite" is not the same as "infinite sets" is not the same as "infinite set") are all things that mathematics allow bitcoin to utilise.

I'm sorry that you can't grasp the concepts being discussed, especially the concept of time having a changing effect on what you now consider to be "static market fundamental s".

Please, try and educate yourself.

>>16310853
Okay then take your fucking meds, retard. Come back when you can post coherently.

>>16310911
right in the feels :'(

Why am I suspicious that it may in fact be you who has a drug problem..? I've personally never felt the need to habitually use any inherently destructive substance.

All of these irrelevant things aside, are you able to show how the analogy is incorrect?do you have a solid understanding of mathematics beyond a college entry level?

You're not just, buying and selling """tokens""" in the hope that you get a leg up on other people and the universe in general, are you?

>>16310853
You're arguing with a double digit IQ whose thought process is literally molded by /pol; why?

>>16311031
I believe the potential to understand is within everyone, even though it may appear to be vanishingly small.

>>16310006
>If everyone simply ignored market sentiment and current price (of any project)
That's impossible to do because it'd take exponentially more money to keep driving the price up.
As the price increases, there's also a greater incentive for early holders to sell some of their coins; if I own 100k Bitcoin that I got back in 2009, I wouldn't mind taking profit on 1k of them at $10k because that gives me enough money to pay for living expenses for at least the next two decades. Even if Bitcoin went to $1m, I'd still have 99k of them.
That's also why the market doesn't go straight up and down unless there's a system-destroying event like an exit scam.

The market does a decent enough job of encouraging people to hold; someone who sold during a bear cycle/missed out on buying during a bear cycle will be more likely to hold through future bear cycles because they remember that the asset went through massive corrections in the past but eventually went back up.

>>16311222
I agree that price will fluctuate and that the current market fundamentals will continue to exist until the supply is distributed among those who, again, will never sell (this process is simply a function of time and human emotion); bitcoin is finite in supply, yet has the great potential to actually be invaluable as a fundamental reserve structure.

>>16310853
You just keep listing lofty concepts that you haven't actually done the work of tying into your half-baked hypothetical at all like a fucking pseud.

>>16311110
Then believe in your own potential to understand and actually sit the fuck down and sort out what you're trying feebly to grasp at in easy and vague terms to sound smart, you fucking undergrad. Stop getting high on your own farts and fucking study.

>>16311110
I agree with your sentiment when applied to most topics, but when it comes to those that rely on mathematical comprehension, is there any way to bridge the gap of math ability with non-math based reasoning?

>>16311352

If you don't understand how bitcoin works, start with reading the whitepaper. Once you understand the whitepaper, move onto other resources; if you believe you can make improvements to the protocol, submit a BIP through github and discuss the proposed changes with other intelligent individuals.

Once you have a solid grasp on the protocol itself, you'll begin to understand that there are specific determinations and consequences that follow.

Now, as this is fourchan, allow me to present to you a hot take on a meme that is commonly expressed here:

> YOU HAD TEN (10) YEARS

>>16311562
Bro I'm not that smart. Is this gonna make me rich or not

>>16311516
Excellent question, simple answer!
>"non-math based reasoning" doesn't actually exist

During my undergraduate classes many years ago, I was introduced to formal syllogism usage (structure of reason); my best advice for those without the understanding you're describing, is simply to study basic logic and reason - a free Logic 101 course online would be sufficient to get the ball rolling.

>>16310006
Do you understand anything about game theory?

>>16311605
Not a great deal, to be honest - I'm an engineer by 'trade'.

>>16311562
>I shouldn't have to explain myself to declare that I'm special and smart and right. If you understood a bunch of other material that isn't mine then you would just automatically understand that I'm correct!
Stop procrastinating on that assignment by shitposting, freshman.

>>16311605
Thanks to this post, I'm currently in the middle of an introduction to game theory, and although I believe I may be able to see some issues with the application of some of these concepts, the overarching logistics is quite interesting indeed..