/biz/ - Business & Finance

is this real

>>11875975
>(((real money)))

>>10117564
There has been so much damage done to this community. I'm afraid they're fearful of another hardfork. Eventually they will have to, but who knows when.

On the other hand bitcoin cash might just implement lightning, but they would need to solve transaction malliablity first.

No matter your stance on scaling, which again is a minor technical implementation detail, we should all be against the banking jews. That's what matters.

>>9706806

k e k @ no coiners

>>9699272
But anon, you MUST (((consume))), otherwise the (((economy))) will collapse.

>implying my amount of BTC go up or down arbitrarily
>implying I will gamble this fact on some shitcoin

Bitcoin doesn't need to "scale", because those who cannot afford transactions are by definition irrelevant within what Bitcoin has to offer.

Some niggers playing in the mud in Africa don't need army grade encryption. This applies to first world average joes too. Most people don't have any money, which is why it's funny seeing idiots worring about "mainstream adoption" because they think that's how Bitcoin reaches the so called Moon, in Reddit terms.

Bitcoin is a monolith in which the deprecation of all fiatings are measured upon.
The world adapts to Bitcoin, not otherwise.

If you accept the mainstream derping about "banking the unbanked" (which itself is just a PR ruse of the USG's to get their fingers into the blockchain), you'll find yourself wanting to do something stupid about minimum transaction values in the Bitcoin network. Once you reduce the minimum fee for broadcasting, a whole slew of smaller transactions will want into each block. That demand will put upward pressure on the price each transaction must pay for inclusion into each 1MB block, pressure that can only be alleviated by increasing the maximum block size. So there you have it: the USG is once again exploiting your kindhearted desire to make the world a better place for someone to whom you're entirely unrelated to fuck up the blockchain.

Bitcoin doesn't need to "scale", because those who cannot afford transactions are by definition irrelevant within what Bitcoin has to offer.

Some niggers playing in the mud in Africa don't need army grade encryption. This applies to first world average joes too. Most people don't have any money, which is why it's funny seeing idiots worring about "mainstream adoption" because they think that's how Bitcoin reaches the so called Moon, in Reddit terms.

Bitcoin is a monolith in which the deprecation of all fiatings are mesured upon.
The world adapts to Bitcoin, not otherwise.

If you accept the mainstream derping about "banking the unbanked" (which itself is just a PR ruse of the USG's to get their fingers into the blockchain), you'll find yourself wanting to do something stupid about minimum transaction values in the Bitcoin network. Once you reduce the minimum fee for broadcasting, a whole slew of smaller transactions will want into each block. That demand will put upward pressure on the price each transaction must pay for inclusion into each 1MB block, pressure that can only be alleviated by increasing the maximum block size. So there you have it: the USG is once again exploiting your kindhearted desire to make the world a better place for someone to whom you're entirely unrelated to fuck up the blockchain.

Bitcoin is a monolith to measure the deprecation of various fiatings.

Just look at the M3 and add about %300+ to it.

>>8819855
This. But the slave is so braindead and used to getting his faggot ass raped for ages that they wouldn't know freedom if they saw it.

Let's use that to our advantage to get as much BTC as possible at these cheap prices.

>>8817233
>if the country owns the printer nothing can go wrong

>>8470881
Fiat is a widespread hallucination.

>((((fiat value))))

>buys bitcoin at X fiat
>sells bitcoin at X+1 fiat
>"look mom, I made profit"

>buys bitcoin at X fiat
>sells bitcoin at X+1 fiat
>"look mom, I made profit"

>buys bitcoin at X fiat
>sells bitcoin at X+1 fiat
>"look moom, I made profit"

>>8272228
Eh, yes it will. Looks like you don't understand what Bitcoin is yet.

>yes, I sold my bitcoins, im finally rich!!

>>8071476
>he implies anything but bitcoin has value