Thread

Bitcoin is very successful. It is on its way to be wildly successful.

For me an OG is someone who hasn't sold his ethics or believes in the last 16 years. In other words, there is only a few OGs left.

They are letting the perfect get in the way of the Good.

Exactly, but worse when you really get into it; They are letting their make believe future get in the way of a revolutionary breakthrough that doesn’t look exactly like they expect… because their imagination isn’t reality.

Any OG has every right to sell. They need or want money. It’s all good. If they succumb to other trash business opportunities it’s unfortunate and human.

"As long as bitcoin becomes money, I don't care that I'll have to pay my property taxes and 6% of my stack to put gas in my car while I cry taxation is theft" That's all I got from this dude....

Value of network grows with greater distribution. OGs selling is good for bitcoin.

😂

Are they really selling though or is it wrench fear?

LOL, if you think OGs will sacrifice the privacy they get with Monero for a little (speculative) fiat NGU. Wishful thinking, Guy!

Taxation is theft and those not using all the tools to disboey are complicit in the crime against humanity that is coercive extortion. OGs moved to Monero to protect the privacy of their families while pushing for the end of global theft. We are NOT the same.

Selling for fiat? LOL That's not sellling for money. It is selling for (social) credit. So I hope we are talking about selling for real fungible money here aka Monero.

As an OG, I can confirm.

🤡

I don’t think there is a single part of your comment that wasn’t 100% imagined from thin air. But don’t mind me keep going 😆👍🏻

Bitcoin is Freedom Money and The Only Freedom Money on planet Earth for a reason. Everyone is free to buy, sell, use, hodl Bitcoin. From the everyday Joe to the largest corporations and ETFs. Bitcoin never refuses an account. Bitcoin transactions are global and peer-to-peer decentralized and unstoppable. And Bitcoin is able to serve everyone, from the smallest transactions on LN to the largest transactions on the Bitcoin blockchain.

Monero's imaginary PrIVAcYY? Is it in the room with you? https://moneroleaks.xyz/ 🤡

Well, your essentially saying you don't care what kind of negative impact happens from ETFs, Wallstreet, SBRs, etc.... When in reality, they do matter and should be talked about, unless your perfectly ok slowly sliding into compliance and leading others to the same. 🤷

Or.... maybe you can explain how your dying unwavering beliefs in bitcoin, won't be used against you in the future...🤷

I've been listening to a few debates most recently Kasper. are they a legitimate threat to Bitcoin? Or is it just more noise to try and make me sell a portion into Kasper? It's so confusing out there... my concern with Kasper is all the faces and primarily from one country!

Freedom = disunity The day everyone agrees on bitcoin is the day it’s been subverted.

What will happen if the government and these bitcoin, treasury companies gobble up immaturity of the supply? Do you have a podcast on that?

What will happen if the government and these bitcoin, treasury companies gobble up the majority of the supply? Do you have a podcast on that?

Go ahead and tell me my balance and any addresses I've transacted with 👇 84mAJEgdihyRHkz8fGeuqgbQ19SuGeFWbhokJG2uMNMwTkDyoyQ3H7BijQNwSriSp9hHfaRGZYpCuKvHJwTer8av845U9py

the OP is exactly right that the entrance of large institutions and hodl only mentality is a problem. regulatory capture is a real risk. y'alls blind faith that Bitcoin is inevitable is an attack on Bitcoin and needs to fucking stop.

my homeboy got it right. STN misrepresents the risks to the point of lying nevent1qgs0ljj5upu0mxyy5azawr4szkwqhz5705ur5jgx5ayyhqlt7cgpm4gpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wshsqgpy06dcaa8gvpzp96kz4c52j2ckwc33ujfgknxttherp3amjgln5gj93f9g

I have said absolutely nothing of the sort and I can't possibly understand how you pulled that from anything I have said. I simply ask for someone to give some evidence or some actual useful information as to what "captured" means and how anything that has happened has resulted in "capture." But that's never given, they just say "this exists, thus captured," literally without defining what that means or how what they point out means it... Which your comment is another decent example of. You don't back it up, you just use my lack of acceptance of this default, reasonless logic, as evidence of some absurd statement like "you just think there can never be any negative impact," a literal light years leap away from demanding some sort of evidence as to what the negative impact is in any material sense and how it means bitcoin is "captured."

Tbh I can't believe my low iq ass even has to explain this to YOU of all people... but here we go... 1. Centralization of Custody through ETFs and Corporations 2. Market Manipulation by "Whales" and Institutions 3. Centralization of Mining Power 4. Regulatory Frameworks and Legal Pressure While institutional adoption of Bitcoin brings legitimacy and increased liquidity, it also introduces significant centralization risks that could and will be used against the core tenets of Bitcoin given governments history. If you need evidence of these and can't do the work, lmk.

First off, these are generic, broad concerns that apply to various degrees perpetually, but “ETFs are here and Bitcoin treasuries have captured bitcoin” aren’t explained by just listing possible ways in which influence *could* be used. Decentralization isn’t the absence of means of influence, it’s when a system has so many variant ways that influence can be both used and then defended against, that no single avenue dominates unilaterally. That said I’ll give a few caveats about the ones you bring up anyway: 1. Holding bitcoin doesn’t not mean control over the protocol or network. And there’s no major concern about the current distribution. Institutions were always going to be here at some point. 2. This is a boogie man very often carried out that is based on common ignorance about markets and what “manipulation” actually is. 3. This has nothing to do with any of the above. It’s just its own issue and I talk about it constantly because it’s actually a problem that exists and is tangible. 4. Regulations have gone lax. I’m more concerned of complacency because things are going our way on that front. In short, you just listed generic ways in which there is influence over various elements of the social sphere or of the various infrastructure used by businesses or institutions. But this is a vast chasm away from “bitcoin has been captured.” I never made the claim that there aren’t dozens of players who could influence things, who operate various parts of the infrastructure, or that there are certain jurisdictions that can set some standards for good or bad - to the contrary that’s exactly what I am and have argued and talk about all the time. But I’m talking about people who literally say “ETFs have bought some bitcoin, bitcoins treasury companies are buying some, therefore bitcoin is captured.” And I’m pointing out, correctly, that this is a nonsense take, and isn’t anything of substance. ———— If none of this is getting through, I’ll use an analogy: - Let’s say we’ve been talking about various risks to bitcoin mining for years. We have real conversations about which pools present which risks, which jurisdictions pose concerns, which protocols allow for block hijacking, etc. Actual substance around the mining problem. - Blackrock makes a mining pool that gets a few percent of the hashrate. Say 10% - People just start instantly claiming Blackrock destroyed Bitcoin. It’s captured, we’re screwed, 51% attacks. The end. - I ask for what the various risks and likelihood are. - Someone screams at me like I’m retarded and says “DUH They’ll 51% attack you moron!” - I say, well yeah but that’s a vague category of thing that CAN happen, you have presented no *substance* here as to how Blackrock now has control over everything. This is what I’m getting at. There’s this weird religion that people who hate Wall Street have, who actually seem to “anti worship” them. They think they are evil, but importantly, they think they are evil *gods* who have total control over whatever they involve themselves in by virtue or simply showing up. And they can’t seem to grasp that they’ve said nothing at all.

So I should be watching for; 1. Unilateral Control over Protocol Development 2. Centralized Control over Transaction Validation/Censorship 3. Suppression of Alternative Narratives/Development 4. Compromise of Core Design Principles

Yes these would be significant indicators. But even these can be widely varied when you get into concrete examples: 1.a Control over development to prevent/stall soft forks or features. (accepted risk of decentralization, likely to happen whether naturally or by “capture”) 1.b Control over development through dev funding and attempting hard fork. (Unlikely, and will cause extreme disruption and would be the worst battle and economic fallout of Bitcoin’s history. Blocksize war but with Wall Street players) 2. This is why I’ve been talking about DATUM non stop and have called it on numerous occasions the most important project in Bitcoin currently. 3. This is not even reasonable to define and is subject to massive guesswork. The social sphere is *always* in flux and there will be ebbs and flows on all issues/values, imo. Theres also some significant sampling problems that make this hard to assess - ex. There are 10 people talking about self custody in a room. 490 people enter the room. There are now 20 people talking about self custody, and 480 talking about stickers. Did the percent of people talking about self custody fall from 100% to 4%? Or did the number of people who care about self custody double? 4. Yes, but must consider it in the context of number 3 and 1 and how they would skew an apparent, but less real, change in those things. In other words, we could have more people caring and developing toward the core values of Bitcoin than ever, but the total loss of that focus in the reference client developers and 90% of “the community” talking about stickers. So it would APPEAR like total loss of values, but it would only be because we are being too targeted and centralized in *where and how* we expect to see them manifest.