cc @mister_monster moving this part of the conversation over here

Good comparison!

I suspect that hodlers are closet commies who feel entitled to shared resources but feel no (or extremely little) personal responsibility for their maintenance. They also often feel entitled to increased purchasing power without any PoW on their own part.

Yup you have done your part for that trip on the road. You paid the toll and there would be an expectation that you would pay the toll again if you need to move your car. The toll (or fee) may cost more or less in the future It is then up to the drivers that are actively using that road to ensure it continues to be maintained by paying the toll every time they utilize that road

But if I use a rental e-bike inside of my HOA community then I should be able to drive the car on a perfect road anytime I want, anywhere I want. Cashu and Lightning Network are not Bitcoin.

Nice fantasy. Obviously no commonly held infrastructure has ever been successful with that funding model. Good talk.

Isn't that the point of the block reward? To incentivize the miners to secure the network until such a time that transaction fees will be enough? A bitcoiner only needs the security provided by miners while a transaction is being added to a block. After that, its in the blockchain and secured by nodes... Not miners. So if anything, running validating nodes provides the security for hodlrs... What's the incentive for running a node? - Being able to privately inspect and verify the block chain So when I drive my car down the toll road, I pay the toll. When I park my car in the parking lot, I can park it for free somewhere and hope their security and privacy is good, or I can park it in my own garage I maintain and keep it secure and private on my own. I don't need to pay to maintain a road I'm not driving on directly. I do pay indirectly because of inflation, as block rewards are mined my share in the network shrinks relative to the whole. This is the price I pay until there's enough drivers to upkeep the road.

You are basically making the statist argument of “who will build the roads” and then telling me that free markets can’t work Great talk!

Nice response 🙏 Except "a Bitcoiner only needs the security provided by miners while a transaction is being add to a block" is not correct. A Bitcoiner is ALWAYS reaping the benefits of the security provided by miners. 24/7 their hash securing the network is perhaps THE biggest guarentee Bitcoin offers. If it disappears, most of the value of the network also disappears. so hodlers *benefit* from Bitcoins network security 24/7 but they get it *for free* "Paying indirectly via inflation" is a viable solution but that is scheduled to go away. And, except for sudden surges of shitcoining, the mempool is pretty desolate.

Many people will say that privacy is a right but don't get that labor is needed to ensure privacy continues, therefore making it not a right.

i mean *maybe there will be enough L1 txs to secure the network someday but it's not looking very good right now. it's ok to hope for the best, but we should at least be informed of the problems. This is one.

Lol this is not what's happening at all. You say you understand what we are saying, but you couldn't be worse at hiding the fact that you don't. You probably dont even realize you don't get it, which is why I'm offering you knowledge, all it takes is humility to learn something new.

Not being aggressed upon is a right. A certain amount of privacy is written into the fabric of the universe and is impossible to take away, thankfully, because privacy is requisite to avoid being aggressed upon. The hiding of information is fundamental to the very possibility of property, and to the nature of reality as not being under the fiat thumb of any human or "collective" consciousness. Privacy is written into the rules that govern physics itself. It is not the fundamental of natural law, however. Nonaggression is.

What the fuck are you talking about? Explain your reasoning so I can show you where it's wrong lol

I mean some are yes but not by virtue of being a hodler.

Labor is required to build firearms. That doesn't mean I don't have a right to buy one, build one, or own one. I don't think anyone is saying one has a right to have some privacy preserving widget given to them free of charge. The US 2nd Amendment doesn't guarantee that Glock give me a free gun, yet I still have a right to bear one. People generally mean they have a right to not have their privacy invaded by force without due process or be prevented from ensuring their own privacy (such as banning privacy preserving tools). In the case of privacy, the 4th amendment is a similar example of this right. Property rights in general exist in part to protect reasonable expectations of privacy. I've never heard anyone define privacy rights as the right to own someone else's labor. If they exist, I assume they are an extreme minority.

Healthcare is an example where I HAVE seen such an incorrect argument. I believe humans have the right to pursue healthcare in a free market, but not to force others to fund it. Governments violate this in many ways, on both sides of the issue.

Deadbeats are deadbeats, whether in fiat or Bitcoin. If you're still working, you buy more, and your fees contribute to the network. If you're not, you spend your coins, and your fees contribute to the network. If you're doing neither, as far as anyone else is concerned, your coins may as well be lost. And maybe the network will be here, maybe it won't when you come back. But whether it is or not is not something you are taking action around being an inert hodler.