The future of Bitcoin and crytocurrencies

[daniels27]

Thanks guys for the discussion. And thanks to @run and @cherry for representing the otherwise under-represented opinion on this forum. A discussion US only worth it if you have two opposing views represented. Look at the government in EUSSR (it the old SSR), running a bubble to tell everybody that they are correct leads to the destruction eventually.

There has been valuable information. But I think some thoughts are worth discussing.

A lot of what if claimed it bitcoin had been claimed about gold or diamonds in the past. As @JackAlabama pointed out (and movies like Lift or Golden Job confirm) it is highly impractical to transport and store. But still, the once so good gold has now been replaced by bitcoin. How can you assure that there won't be something better tomorrow which is immune against... I think @run already pointed out that a change of the bitcoin is always possible. We already have hard forks such as bitcoin gold. And remember that at least after to many hard forks, the value eventually will suffer. And while not everyone agrees with @cherry here, @wellington recently made a post effectively making crypto is the US difficult as once was good ownership

Thread 'Papers Please = DeFi'

Dec 28, 2024

Seems the IRS/Treasury is going to force compliance with the US for DeFi, much like how my asian banks ask me to do FACTA forms annually... they want KYC/Tax reporting for DeFi transactions going forward.

https://www.financemagnates.com/cry...as-brokers-mandates-gross-proceeds-reporting/

All will have to comply, those that don't will get indicted to set examples.

DeFi will need to learn how to launch operating from within chain (front ends -> i've done that before so it can be done even dynamically).

And walk away from it.

• wellington
• Replies: 5
• Forum: Let's talk body

• 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

 

[JackAlabama]

Thanks guys for the discussion. And thanks to @run and @cherry for representing the otherwise under-represented opinion on this forum. A discussion US only worth it if you have two opposing views represented. Look at the government in EUSSR (it the old SSR), running a bubble to tell everybody that they are correct leads to the destruction eventually.

There has been valuable information. But I think some thoughts are worth discussing.

A lot of what if claimed it bitcoin had been claimed about gold or diamonds in the past. As @JackAlabama pointed out (and movies like Lift or Golden Job confirm) it is highly impractical to transport and store. But still, the once so good gold has now been replaced by bitcoin. How can you assure that there won't be something better tomorrow which is immune against... I think @run already pointed out that a change of the bitcoin is always possible. We already have hard forks such as bitcoin gold. And remember that at least after to many hard forks, the value eventually will suffer.

well, 15 years in and only Bitcoin has delivered on its promise (censorship resistant transactions and no third party (bank, oracle input) needed). Its proven to be resistant against the nation state attacks (nation welfare state paradigm is fading out and losing power).
Id say the next big innovation in that space comes after the next fourth turning aka 80 years.

Uncle Pete will love me for saying gold still having some value due to having had such a long history and analog life / things seem to matter some more time (until 90% live in pods on a constant soma injection and VR).
Id also forsee the bond market will lose relevance and bonds as interest paying money will flowing into gold and bitcoin.

For defi and other crypto, well since pressure points can be applied to its teams, its only a matter of time until its done (slow but will happen).

 

[daniels27]

well, 15 years in and only Bitcoin has delivered on its promise (censorship resistant transactions and no third party (bank, oracle input) needed). Its proven to be resistant against the nation state attacks (nation welfare state paradigm is fading out and losing power).
Id say the next big innovation in that space comes after the next fourth turning aka 80 years.

Uncle Pete will love me for saying gold still having some value due to having had such a long history and analog life / things seem to matter some more time (until 90% live in pods on a constant soma injection and VR).
Id also forsee the bond market will lose relevance and bonds as interest paying money will flowing into gold and bitcoin.

For defi and other crypto, well since pressure points can be applied to its teams, its only a matter of time until its done (slow but will happen).

In other words all others are shitcoins.

 

[JohnnyDoe]

In other words all others are shitcoins.

Xmr is not

 

[rss]

well, 15 years in and only Bitcoin has delivered on its promise (censorship resistant transactions and no third party (bank, oracle input) needed). Its proven to be resistant against the nation state attacks (nation welfare state paradigm is fading out and losing power).

Bitcoin has undeniably delivered on its promise of censorship-resistant, trustless transactions, but Ethereum has also achieved groundbreaking advancements that shouldn't be overlooked... Just to mention some Smart Contracts, DeFi, NFTs, DAOs, Layer 2 Scaling and so on...

While Bitcoin excels as digital gold and a store of value, Ethereum has expanded blockchain potential by enabling a decentralized economy. The innovation isn’t just 80 years away, it’s happening right now across multiple platforms.

(I also own a ton of ETH so pls buy my shitcoin)

 

[cherry]

Thanks for the acknowledgement, @daniels27. People have been taking my posts far too personally, which seems to be a trait of crypto fans of any coin. I like XMR, and they too become unfriendly on Reddit when I say it still has BTC's same problem of having no asset value, or that they shouldn't wish for a big rise in speculative price.

So when I make criticisms, it's coming from an objective and cautious view. I do want decentralized cryptos to succeed. XMR has a circular economy culture, but that circular economy needs to grow much bigger to have more utility. I'm also aware that if it does grow bigger as people want to get away from CBDC and BTC tracking, the governments could step in again and ban shops from accepting it, or just announce its ownership as illegal. We'll see how that develops.

 

[daniels27]

Thanks for the acknowledgement, @daniels27. People have been taking my posts far too personally, which seems to be a trait of crypto fans of any coin. I like XMR, and they too become unfriendly on Reddit when I say it still has BTC's same problem of having no asset value, or that they shouldn't wish for a big rise in speculative price.

So when I make criticisms, it's coming from an objective and cautious view. I do want decentralized cryptos to succeed. XMR has a circular economy culture, but that circular economy needs to grow much bigger to have more utility. I'm also aware that if it does grow bigger as people want to get away from CBDC and BTC tracking, the governments could step in again and ban shops from accepting it, or just announce its ownership as illegal. We'll see how that develops.

Yes, and that is exactly what we need. Of course, I can post here everyday how bitcoin, Switzerland and Austrian Economics are great and will save the world. I will get many likes and people will show me all their love. But how is this any better than the USSR? Not at all. They also all reported to Gorbatchev how great he and the USSR is and he believed it as everybody was telling him so. Eventually reality caught him cold.

I can higly recommend reading the book (it is in German though) Pulverfass Sovietunion it is from 1990 (I found it during a house dumping job and decided to keep it when I was at the trash hall) https://www.google.ch/books/edition/Pulverfass_Sowjetunion/iHUPNAAACAAJ?hl=en

That's why I keep posting the "other" view which I deem under represented here. It only adds value to the discussion. It is not that the view does not exist, I am just expressing it for you. If you post too much how bad Switzerland is, I will represent the other half of the reality and vice versa.

I once had a private discussion with late @jafo on that topic. That was his reply:

Keep telling the facts and your experiences because others, in this case, me, learn from it, and we adjust our sails to avoid capsizing our "ship."

@JohnnyDoe @void @W Fish when we question your opinion, it does not mean that we do not agree. It is a request for a more profund discussion which does not ignore any arguments that are already out there but just not spoken out. Never kill the messenger! Embrace the invitation and come with the arguments. No need to feel offended, we have your back covered. Believing what your teacher says maybe makes you a good kid, but not a successful adult. Always remember @jafo and contribute to the discussion in a productive manner.

Here and here:
https://www.offshorecorptalk.com/th...ical-proofs-regarding-mafias-in-europe.46333/

 

[JohnnyDoe]

@JohnnyDoe @void @W Fish when we question your opinion

Math is not an opinion. Please do refute the paper I posted with mathematical evidence.

 

[daniels27]

Math is not an opinion. Please do refute the paper I posted with mathematical evidence.

I think the paper has been reviewed and we agreed, including the assumption that USD is the worst shitcoin as you correctly put it.

However, the paper leaves out a very important debate. Is there an intrinsic demand for bitcoin or is it just a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy? The whole paper is based on the assumption that people will buy bitcoin to hedge USD. But it leaves out the fact, that people are also buying stocks, real estate, gold, diamonds, roman coins, and many similar things the like. While the statements in your paper are all true and we all agree, the paper is actually talking about a completely generic phenomenon with anything that is limited in its total supply. It does nowhere explain why there will be a continuous demand for bitcoin. And of course, the assumption of t tending towards infinity while the USD value of bitcoin tends towards infinitly is already pretty funny. Do you really believe anybody to stock bitcoin in even 1000 years?

But those flaws left aside, I think we agree with your math.

And while we are at it. You may want to write this properly in terms of mathematics:

\lim_{t\to\infty} X(t) = \infty

And btw, typing it out in LaTeX makes it look much more professional and credible.

 

[diro]

obvious good discussion that deserve to be even more penetrated.

 

[rss]

The whole paper is based on the assumption that people will buy bitcoin to hedge USD. But it leaves out the fact, that people are also buying stocks, real estate, gold, diamonds, roman coins, and many similar things the like.

Bitcoin is superior because it combines the best attributes of traditional assets (scarcity, utility, and demand) while offering unique advantages (decentralization, security, and global access).

Your whole argument misunderstands the nature of Bitcoin value... Bitcoin isn't expected to reach "infinity" in price, rather, as fiat currencies devalue due to inflation, BTC purchasing power increases. This reflects why it is a hedge against fiat, not some mythical valuation model.

As for 1000 years from now, it’s speculative, but bticoin durability comes from its decentralization, the fact that it is open-source and ability to adapt. Few assets can claim similar longevity prospects.

 

[daniels27]

Bitcoin is superior because it combines the best attributes of traditional assets (scarcity, utility, and demand) while offering unique advantages (decentralization, security, and global access).

Yes, and it is not bound to any physical object. But there are also shortcomings. I think we can all see the superiority. But that is a prerequisite on which the paper is based on but it does not state it. We can write any paper on anything, the question is what are the prerequisites for it to hold true.

Your whole argument misunderstands the nature of Bitcoin value... Bitcoin isn't expected to reach "infinity" in price, rather, as fiat currencies devalue due to inflation, BTC purchasing power increases. This reflects why it is a hedge against fiat, not some mythical valuation model.

Well, the paper clearly states that bitcoin's exchange rate in USD tends to infinity over time.

As for 1000 years from now, it’s speculative, but bticoin durability comes from its decentralization, the fact that it is open-source and ability to adapt. Few assets can claim similar longevity prospects.

Some believe in gold, some in real estate, some in bitcoin. In the end it is all a matter of taste. I am not taking sides here.

But what most miss in the discussion is that in the end the number of potential owners also has a direct influence of the value of any limited-supply item.

And: If you ask doomsday preppers (anyone here?), all your coins are useless as they only work with electricity and internet.

 

[rss]

Some believe in gold, some in real estate, some in bitcoin. In the end it is all a matter of taste. I am not taking sides here.

But what most miss in the discussion is that in the end the number of potential owners also has a direct influence of the value of any limited-supply item.

And: If you ask doomsday preppers (anyone here?), all your coins are useless as they only work with electricity and internet.

Calling it 'taste' misses a key distinction...Bitcoin isn’t just another asset. It’s a decentralized, global monetary network.

As for doomsday preppers, sure, without electricity or the internet, bitcoin loses function, just like stock markets, banks, and most modern infrastructure.
But if we’re in full societal collapse, stocking up on canned goods will probably beat gold too. Bitcoin is built for a functioning, evolving world, not apocalptic scenarios.

 

[daniels27]

Calling it 'taste' misses a key distinction...Bitcoin isn’t just another asset. It’s a decentralized, global monetary network.

Yes, but then there are people who prefer being paid in gold or shitcoin for various reasons. In the end it remains a matter of taste. And USDT DAI [edit sorry guys] is also a decentralized, global monetary network, so that cannot be the distinctive part.

 

[ilke]

And USDT is also a decentralized

Hmmmmm

function addBlackList (address _evilUser) public onlyOwner {
    isBlackListed[_evilUser] = true;
    AddedBlackList(_evilUser);
}

function destroyBlackFunds (address _blackListedUser) public onlyOwner {
    require(isBlackListed[_blackListedUser]);
    uint dirtyFunds = balanceOf(_blackListedUser);
    balances[_blackListedUser] = 0;
    _totalSupply -= dirtyFunds;
    DestroyedBlackFunds(_blackListedUser, dirtyFunds);
}

 

[W Fish]

However, the paper leaves out a very important debate. Is there an intrinsic demand for bitcoin or is it just a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy? The whole paper is based on the assumption that people will buy bitcoin to hedge USD. But it leaves out the fact, that people are also buying stocks, real estate, gold, diamonds, roman coins, and many similar things the like. While the statements in your paper are all true and we all agree, the paper is actually talking about a completely generic phenomenon with anything that is limited in its total supply. It does nowhere explain why there will be a continuous demand for bitcoin. And of course, the assumption of t tending towards infinity while the USD value of bitcoin tends towards infinitly is already pretty funny. Do you really believe anybody to stock bitcoin in even 1000 years?

The funny thing about it is that this is not something that you solve with a debate.
Like after a war or battle the winners just impersons what is right, here too - we can debate until the sun goes down but for example:
two guys who have equal amount of wealth today will have a massively different amount in 20 years if ceteris paribus one holds BTC and the other fiat. The first guy still can make an impact on economic and other decisions and the other not. Simple as that. BTC is just better, more efficient technology than fiat.

It is totally irrelevant if in 1000 yeats somebody stocks BTC or not. If a better thechnology will emerge, then maybe not. For sure nobody stocks fiat though.

 

[daniels27]

Hmmmmm

Sorry, Thanks for your comment. I meant DAI. But my point was that there are many shitcoins that are also decentralised.

 

[daniels27]

The funny thing about it is that this is not something that you solve with a debate.
Like after a war or battle the winners just impersons what is right, here too - we can debate until the sun goes down but for example:
two guys who have equal amount of wealth today will have a massively different amount in 20 years if ceteris paribus one holds BTC and the other fiat. The first guy still can make an impact on economic and other decisions and the other not. Simple as that. BTC is just better, more efficient technology than fiat.

Yes, but the point of the discussion here is what is the future of bitcoin. Apparently, some believe less in it than others, otherwise, we would not have this thread. There also is @JohnnyDoe backing a slow horse and getting laughed at by @wellington. Remember, even slow horses deserve some affection.

It is totally irrelevant if in 1000 yeats somebody stocks BTC or not. If a better thechnology will emerge, then maybe not. For sure nobody stocks fiat though.

People still stock roman coins in 2025. I am pretty sure they will be doing the same with USD quarters in 4050. Cannot be that bad.

 

[void]

I posted this once or twice.... why not again

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2jAZ0x9H0bRvoNt1xNJWYa9_8_an03h0

it's essential to watch both these series and then continue this discussion... or not

 

[W Fish]

Yes, but the point of the discussion here is what is the future of bitcoin. Apparently, some believe less in it than others, otherwise, we would not have this thread. There also is @JohnnyDoe backing a slow horse and getting laughed at by @wellington. Remember, even slow horses deserve some affection.

I tend to NOT attribute this to beliefs. I would rather like to think that it is about understanding.
It took me too probably like 3 approaches before i started to understand a little about the economic side of BTC although I have studied economics in uni. The first two times I turned away because I thought that is has no use.

People still stock roman coins in 2025. I am pretty sure they will be doing the same with USD quarters in 4050. Cannot be that bad.

Sure, for numismatic purposes. As abacuses are held for museal value and not for performing calculations.