The people who lament central bank inflation are the same people who dilute Bitcoin by hyper inflating Bitcoin with a hundred thousand shitcoins.
It seems to me that the person that is Craig Wright aka Satoshi Nakamoto has changed.
@kyuupichan. The data comes from coinlib, an alternate to coin market cap, it is a summary of exchange pair trading volume with BSV from all the monitored exchanges.
Not capitulation, rebranding. He's using kung fu and talking about turning the power of his competitors against them. That's just good business practice. You don't condemn your competitors, you just play smarter. Whether you cal BitCoin a blockchain or a sidechain is up to the marketing department.
LOL... give me a moment.... LOL
If there is no opportunity to speculate on the success of the protocol - i.e. - the price of the BSV token, there is no need to discuss it, just use the protocol and create wealth - then - profit. In the scenario devoid of speculation on the token, any benefit goes to the business who use the technology and the users just benefit from market competition.
Such a binary way of looking at the world. But if you parse your line of thought, it is correct, just not the way you think. Firstly, yes if you need to build a market, then it helps to build a product first. Don't count on venture capitalists or speculators to fund you. Bootstrapping can be far more profitable for the enterprise.
This type of uncertainty is going to kill BSV, the Chinese with their CBDC will be as trustworthy as, if not more trustworthy, than Western Governments and their KYC licence required to use money. Have you read Ayn Rand?
who's ever relied on venture capitalists (more like vulture not venture)
Entrepreneurs and capitalists are the speculators, that's what they do, they take the risks and do things that may or may not work, the CSW cult followers are missing the forest for the trees.
I'm not seeing it, I see people using words, but I don't see any capitalists just a billionaire venture capitalists and nChain funding a few good ideas. No bootstrapping going on there.
You're conflating two different issues. Certainly, China will embrace Bitcoin as a network for the Nakamoto consensus. Recognizing what is and isn't currency is entirely different. China is way ahead of you. They already ruled about Bitcoin and I don't see anything changing except they will probably prefer BSV and force registered wallets rather than allow stakeholder sidechains. Woe to a Chinese man that failed to fulfil a sidechain contract.
Pure confabulation. Never once have I heard such a claim. Besides, who is advocating government? Do you mean laws? Are you saying laws are never good?
Many developers in every major tech industry though I do get most of my business education from TV shows like Silicon Valley.
On this, we agree. But most of them don't tip their hand until something big happens. Do you think there aren't enterprise developers with deep pockets not looking into CSWs claims? I'm not a cultist. I like the tech. Time will tell, but smart money invests before the crowd.
"Nakamoto consensus" only works when the token is valued. The higher the price the more valuable the blockchain, there is no "Nakamoto consensus" if "The government can make them invalid at any time."
Let me quote the common law definition of currency, (there is a legislated definition that CSW tryes to pass off as the anarchic definition to serve his socialist agenda, don't believe him, do your own research.
A currency in the most specific sense is money in any form when in use or circulation as a medium of exchange it comes from From Middle English: curraunt, "in circulation", from Latin: , -entis, literally meaning "running" or "traversing"Just listen to what CSW says about government fiat and why it's good and why bitcoin is not a currency, he does not call himself a socialist, but if one was to rank socialist behaviours, making fiat out of nothing to spend it on "programs," is socialist and a CSW value. It is at the top of the socialist hierarchy, it literally destroys Capitalism every time in history. So undermining a value native to Bitcoin and supporting the ultimate government tool to implement socialism makes one a socialist. Even if you claim to be a capitalist it's just a word salard when you confuse definitions like CSW does.
"invest" as in investing and speculation on the token are two very different ideas. People invest in mining hardware - they don't necessarily invest in the token, Taal spent $3,000,000,000 of CSW's BSV as a loan because, I presume he wanted them to short it and mine it back, that's effectively money laundering across jurisdictional boundaries to avoid Tax. They invested the money in mining hardware by selling the BSV. They may never mine back the BSV, they could use it to mine BTC and probably do, also. The value was denominated in dollars probably because they value dollars more than the BSV.
when did your narrative for bitcoin stop needing a market? I would argue it was after it lost most of the markets.
That's just as delusional, they did not make it happen, the inertia of investors and entrepreneurs wanting to preserve bitcoin made it happen, mainly the people who exchanged one Bitcoin for the other made it happen.
Ancap fantasies. Money creation is credit creation, which is proof of work. Societies who create a lot of credit (debt), create a lot of money at the same time, because it's essentially the same. Venezuela, Zimbabwe on the other hand don't, hence their governments are not able to create money. They would be happy if your theory were real. It's never the government that creates money. You can't create money out of nothing.