/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>216879
Anyone that believes that the market cap of BTC will ever be 12 trillion has a little touch of downs

Only 21 million bitcoin will exist. There's nearly 7 billion people on the planet, many spending $200+ on food per week. Do the math

>>216879
>All these people have reputations
>not just some random guy in a suit making bogus claims because they already invested everything into this pyramid scheme.
i bet just by participating in those videos they already gained more reputation be they lying or not.

>>216889
buttcoins are a global currency with no controlling entity

it's not one nation's currency, and may never be

>>216898
>nobody will ever be able to control muh buttcoins!

BTC

...

I cant see people getting past the fact things will cost 0.000002314btc

how fuckingf confusing will that be??

>>216919
We will have to move the decimal place or call the one ten millionth unit a Satoshi like we have been

If a bitcoin is infinitely divisible. Why have more than one bitcoin in existence?

>>216919
Thats 2314 satoshi, how is that any more confusing than 2314$?

>>216956
>>216926

Yeah idk man. I think people will constantly want to know what the worth of whatever they're buying is in dollars just so they can see if they're getting shafted.

gonna be a tough transition

>>216927
Would it be more difficult to get people to adopt it early and disribute the wealth that way? I feel like there would be less of an incentive.

>>216978
Just wait a couple of years when the dollar has collapsed

>>216927
If you ask me, 21 million sure as hell is not some arbitrary number a kooky old US defense contractor picked.

>>216879
They're claiming bitcoins are worth investing in because they already bought some and need everyone else to buy some to boost the value of their investment before they dump them all.

>>217033
>greater fool theory
It's the other way around. Anyone who dumps their bitcoin is the greater fool.

>>216889
>Anyone that believes that the market cap of BTC will ever be 12 trillion has a little touch of downs

HHS budget for 2015 is 1 trillion.

12 trillion ain't what it used to be.

>>217756
>mfw Apple has the highest market cap of any company in the world at $439 billion even higher than exxon, google or walmart
>mfw when you think BTC will exceed apple by 20 times
>b-b-but muh currency!
BTC is shit as a currency and will never come close to competing with USD or YEN or EUROs. It is just too fucking volatile. Imagine people trying to use BTC to buy anything when the value halves sporadically on a whim.
>b-b-but you can use muh BTC to buy stuff! I saw somewhere where someone was buying a house with muh Buttcoins!
BTC will never be mutually accepted as a currency, period. Even if it was (hypothetically speaking since the mere thought is ridiculous) you do realize that the amount of USD in circulation is only $1.2 trillion? So you think the total value of BTC in circulation will exceed 10 times the total value of USD? wahahaha
You buttcoin nuts are retarded as shit.

BTC will be the gold bricks of the future.
Meanwhile another coin which excels at transaction/confirmation speed will be used for daily use.
Both will be merge mined, so there will be an even bigger incentive for miners
Alt coins will exist for niche markets like coin tumbling. A few will gain ground but most will die.

This is my prediction anyway, btc could tank to 0.50$ tomorrow.

>>217827
>You buttcoin nuts are retarded as shit

When people get mad and start typing out "buttcoin" I can imagine them nervously laughing the word and twitching.

I think a 12 trillion market cap might be pushing it, too. But I also remember the buttcoin guys nervously twitching and extremely upset about the prospect of Bitcoin crossing $2.

I imagine that is is a special type of regret. Picture yourself extremely upset about retarded as shit downs children that know nothing about money, nothing about investing and nothing about technology. Now picture that they're saying outrageous things about how Bitcoin will one day be worth over $5 each. Now picture yourself tracking down the forums that these idiot children post on and telling them how stupid they are, month after month after month -- for years.

Can you imagine how frustrating this has to be for those people who are so smart that they see right through bitcoin-- nay BUTTCOIN. To have voluntarily passed up an opportunity to make literally hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars so to stay pure to their superior socialist economic principles...

Stay true, comrade. I know it's frustrating, but it's important that socialists stay poor as fuck.

>>217978
There is a lot of guessing in this post so I will tell you who I am not (this will eliminate any confusion):
>I am not mad at BTCs success any more than I would be mad at anyone making money.
>I am not one of those people that thought that Bitcoin would never go up in value.
>I am not one of those people that spam BTC threads with FUD
>I am not one of those people that said that Bitcoin would die after MtGox
>I am not one of those people that doesn't see BTC as a valuable technological innovation and a step in the right direction
>I do not think that the value of Bitcoin will ever tank completely or even go down much in the near future

That's as far as I go though. BTC will never be a currency because it is not centralized which makes it too volatile being prone to massive bubbles and crashes. Have people made money on speculation of Bitcoin? Absolutely. Nobody denies that. However, all the sudden you have tons of clairvoyant motherfuckers who hold 1 Bitcoin that can SEE THE FUTURE and like to remind everyone that one day soon "muh buttcoins will be worth a million dollars each!" which is not even remotely possible in any realm of reason. I refuse to believe that they are so detached from reality and caught up in the hype of becoming a millionaire that they can't do simple math. I am sorry but this type of stupidity just breeds more stupidity.

>>217038
so ima be rich? i have 3 btc
but when

>>218493
3 btc!
You're already rich!

>>218037
Volatility is disagreement about what the market cap should be. You are saying the same thing twice. Yes, people have wildly different ideas about what the market cap should be, and yes it is volatile.

Eventually there will be more agreement on how to properly value bitcoin, and there will be a few tens of billions of dollars on the buy and sell side over a small spread.

I expect that Bitcoin will remain about as volatile as Berkshire stock.

The autism is strong with this thread. If anyone here thinks that governments and central banks are just going to roll over to BTC, yall niggas really on dat dope.

>>218683
>there will be a few tens of billions of dollars on the buy and sell side over a small spread
>I expect that Bitcoin will remain about as volatile as Berkshire stock
Hey everyone look! We have another fortune teller on our hands! Rub that crystal ball and tell me... am I going to marry my highschool sweety?!! Please respond.

You idiot. BTC is in no way like Berkshire stock (which is at a $300 million dollar market cap by the way, no where near the $12 trillion market cap that people say BTC will be at). The value of BTC is built purely on speculation meaning people are guessing wtf it should be worth. At least other businesses and publicly traded companies (if you can call Bitcoin a business since there is no board of directors or CEO) have tangible assets and earning reports and sales figures and revenue streams that can be tied back to providing a service or selling a product. This revenue can be analyzed, quantified and somewhat forecasted which is why people feel safe enough to invest. On the other hand, the main reason people invest in BTC is "everyone told me it's gonna be worth more!" and then they go and tell everyone else "it's gonna be worth more!" hoping to drive the price up by artificially inflating demand.
>b-b-but BTC does provide a service! it's like secure and stuff and faster than Western Union!
If it's meant to be a rival for Western Union and take over that market then lets give it a market cap similar to WU at around $9 billion. (ironically, that is not too far off from Bitcoin market cap right now)
>b-b-but its revolutionary! soon everyone in the world is going to use it as a currency!
Why? Why would everyone all the sudden just adopt BTC as the leading world reserve currency over USD with no regulatory compliance to keep it in check and with the bulk of BTC in the hands of a very few early adopters who can manipulate the value at will? Do you seriously think this would ever happen? Or that the Fed would even allow this? Derp.

>>217827
Just wonder at this guy's tact! If he is a bitcoin skeptic, then it is sure to succeed as the first virtual commodity/currency hybrid, a concept he clearly has heard about.

>>218037
>"If, and I do mean IF, most of the major governments and corporate media networks even allow the internet to EVER surpass the phonebook market, their is no way it will EVER rival all the print, tv, movie, hell even shitty old radio will always be bigger, PEROID."
>yfw in the year 1991

Get with times. Is the internet centralized? How much is the internet worth?

You are pitting 21 million units against (approaching) infinity USD.

Do the math.

>>219128
As if being a "hybrid" in it self justifies why it should be worth 1000 times more right? It has very little value as a currency since people cant hold any type of real worth in it due to its speculatory nature. It has very little value as a commodity since it has no tangible use (you can at least make watches out of gold). All of the value of BTC lies in the fact that it provides a service (used as a transitory currency that can make fast secure payments without chargebacks). I don't think anyone denies the fact that it has use. BTC shills just need to stop hyping it up like people hyped the real estate market before the bubble burst. If BTC is so undervalued it would have already rebounded to the $1200 mark it hit last year. It didn't and hasn't still. So cut the shit.

>>219153
>comparing the internet which already has the means of transferring information (digital IOUs which in turn can be cashed for real currency) to an internet protocol that does the exact same thing albeit a little more secure and faster

>>219220
>exact same thing
>a little bit more secure and faster
>a little bit
ha

>>219197
>BTC shills just need to stop hyping it up like people hyped the real estate market before the bubble burst. If BTC is so undervalued it would have already rebounded to the $1200 mark it hit last year. It didn't and hasn't still. So cut the shit.

Wow, spouting random deadlines. I can't argue with that nonsense. Money I have in bitcoin is rising in value, and USD I have keeps going down.

hardchoice.jpg

>>219220
>a little more secure and faster

Check up on it and the 30 petahash no-central-node network. It really is worth it.

>>219298
Bitcoin encryption is about as secure as military and government applications. Which is a little bit more secure than online bank applications that large banks such as Wells Fargo and BofA utilize. For the most part this extra security is unnecessary since banks offer a certain level of protection in the case of bank fraud and can trace transactions back to a source (lack of anonymity). Banks internal network being broken into with brute force hacking techniques is almost unheard of anymore because of the time it would take to set up (6month min.), firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and the ability to track down the culprit after the theft. The majority of all bank fraud happens when a password is compromised or a physical card is stolen. In the case of credit card theft the bank is able to reverse the damage with chargebacks (which BTC is incapable of). Bitcoin wallets have been broken into before and cleaned out (passwords are usually compromised by keyloggers in the host system)

As far as speed of money transfers, yes Bitcoin is faster than Western Union, Money Gram, and cross-bank transactions. If you were to send money from a BofA bank account to a Wells Fargo bank account, its not going to be an instant transfer. If you want to send money from a BofA account to a BofA account however the transaction is instantaneous because of network connectivity. This is where BTC excels because no matter what bank you have, every transaction is limited to an hour. With that being said it is no more difficult to open a bank account with BofA as it is to open and use an account on a BTC gateway.

So... is Bitcoin more secure than the banking system now? Maybe in some ways? Are Bitcoin transactions faster than bank transactions? Maybe in some ways? Bitcoin is supposed to improve on the current system and in some ways it does but I can see lots of potential for BTC gateways operating no differently from large banks and abusing the system (MtGox prime example).

>>219521
>Money I have in bitcoin is rising in value
Haha I can't argue with that irrefutable evidence. You're right... Bitcoin will rise forever! To the moon!

>>219545
>You're right... Bitcoin will rise forever!

I didn't say anything even similar to that, Sour grapes. You have to use logic and subtlety to make ironic exaggerations.

>can we have a serious thread on btc?
>it's not serious

average cryptocurrency thread

>>219607
>>can we have a serious thread on btc?
>>it's not serious
>average cryptocurrency thread
>Not 100% the fault of nocoin trolls

Average nocoiners shitposting with info from 2013.

>>219600
You're right. I can't get anything past you can I!

>>219630
I am liking what you're bringing to the table. These are some good solid arguments here. Kudos to you my friend.

>>219539
>Are Bitcoin transactions faster than bank transactions? Maybe in some ways?

Yes, they are.

>>219539
You've heard of the multisig thing coming to buttcoin right?

It will make escrow and letting banks hold your buttcoins much more secure.

uses 3 keys instead of 1 key

can give the bank two keys with which they will verify the amount, etc. and need your third key to spend/steal it (or for you to sign off on the transaction, preferably from your client).

it's like Mt.Goy would never have happened

>>219539
tl;dr
Bitcoin as a project can never go away.

>>219781
I haven't heard of multisig with Bitcoin but that sounds pretty interesting and would definitely improve on the existing framework. I can absolutely see a scenario where BTC or some other form of digital currency (like Ripple which already has ties to the Fed) works in tandem with the current banking structure but I can't imagine any eventuality where BTC gateways would ever replace banks. People who are bullish on Bitcoin would love you to believe this, however. Public opinion has swayed in the last decade even more than ever to a complete distrust and disdain for the banking system and I am sure banks would welcome alternative means to bring people (commodity hoarders) back into the fold under the guise of an "anti-banking technology" like BTC.

>>219883
>doesn't read
>argues with me on a point I never made

>>219898
it covers any point you may have brought up, no one should have to read walls of text to deduce that it is worth putting just 10 bucks in because of how it does supersede the fiat system and infrastructure and will always (for the near term) be worked on by the foundation.

>>219913
>walls of text
>takes 30 seconds
Put in 10 dollars. Nobody is telling you not to lol. Put in a hundred thousand dollars for all I care. It's going to be worth a million per BTC one day so you are sure to get rich my friend! Nobody knows about Bitcoin so as soon as they all hear about this wonderful new innovation I am sure it will explode 1000 times over!

>>219926
strawman2gud

>>219933
Ah so you do know what a strawman argument is! Whew! I thought >>219883 was just you being silly.

>>219940
>moving the goalpost
>not a strawman
m8 idk but if you want to talk supply and demand you're dumb as shit

>>219947

>>219949

>>219952

>>219961
mfw you will never address my post shitposter scum?

>>219972
I haven't seen one coherent thought out of you. I am beginning to think you're a little slow. What was your point anyways? Have you even made one in this whole thread? The only non-vague thing you have said is that anyone who dumps BTC is a fool (which lacks any real basis) and that Bitcoin will never go away (which in itself is sort of retarded since everything goes away given enough time)

>>219980
yeah yeah ad hom all you want, lmfao look at how mad you are, you just parenthetically stated something I put in parentheses earlier

>>216978
Most wallets provide automatic btc to usd conversion, and if most wallets start using satoshis or nanobits or whatever people will not notice except maybe the first time and it will have a message explaining what happened just like when most wallets switched to millibits

>>219986
I guess I need to repeat my question since we have now determined that you ARE slow. It's OK even Einstein had some learning disabilities so you shouldn't feel too bad.
>What was your point anyways? Have you even made one in this whole thread?

>>219992
>ad hom all you want

>>219994
OK I am going to ignore you now lol. You have provided exactly zero intelligent input into this discussion. Lurk moar next time if you don't want to punked

>>220013
I'm pretty sure someone could clinically diagnose you as a narcissist by reading this thread

>buttcoins...lol

>>220027
>>220013
Both of you are idiots

>>216879
Does the guy that owns that car know you put english muffins on it?

>>218983
>You idiot. BTC is in no way like Berkshire stock (which is at a $300 million dollar market cap by the way, no where near the $12 trillion market cap that people say BTC will be at)

I think you meant $300 billion.. and I think that's about where Bitcoin is likely to be in the next couple of years.

Most of your trolling and strawmen arguments seem to be based around your distaste for /r/bitcoin level enthusaism. Speaking for myself, I don't like their brand of naive touchy-feely group hug cheerleading either.

I think your skepticism on Bitcoin's chances of achieving a substantial market capitalization might be more affected by reddit commentors than should be the case.

If Bitcoin achieves a major adoption, then there is good reason to think that its major function could be to serve as a store of value. This is laughed at today because of its volatility, but I'm not convinced that this will always be the case. Markets are extremely efficient when there is sufficient liquidity. That volatility will be eaten up if there are massive orderbooks with billions of standby dollars, euros &c in forex markets.

High frequency trading vultures are already descending on Bitcoin from Wall Street... and if Bitcoin makes a serious run at the bullion markets, it's not inconceivable that it could capture 5-10%.

I think there is a very real possibility that Bitcoin could reach $1T market capitalization if it turns out that it is perceived as a competitive store of value in the bullion markets.

That being said, price speculation is the least interesting topic in Bitcoin because nobody cares when you're right or wrong. I was wrong about Bitcoin in 2011 when I thought it couldn't break $2. Who cares.

>>220055

i think we should tell on him

>>220241

>oops exchange goes offline with hundreds of billions of dollars

>>218983

>muh regulations

the appeal to bitcoin is the predictability of it; there will only ever be 21 million buttcoins in existence based off the algorithm, but total USD in circulation is dependant on how the bernanke/yallen feels on a given day.

>>220248
>oops exchange goes offline with hundreds of billions of dollars

what are Open Transactions, voting pools, multisig?

The ability for an exchange to disappear with bitcoins is going to be eliminated by the end of 2014.

The fiat is a different case.

>>220248

that has nothing to do with core bitcoin program

that has everything to do with fat fucking autistic weaboo jews

can someone answer me this: why did bitcoins come to a standstill in the past week?

Volumes have gown down tremendously, and the coin price stayed the same. Nobody is selling/buying anymore

What did I miss?

>>220297

god dammit what´s going on?

>>220241
>$300 billion
Thanks for the correction on the typo.
>I think that's about where Bitcoin is likely to be in the next couple of years
Predictions on a commodity that has no real value beyond that derived from pure speculation are worthless. That is like someone trying to predict how high the value of beanie babies would go when they were hot shit. BTC isn't exactly like beanie babies in that at least they have somewhat of a purpose rather than "oh cool I have one" but the correlation still stands. There is no real proprietary service that Bitcoin offers, evidenced by all the shitcoins that followed. Any bank, company, or organization can follow the exact same model and create their own virtual currency. The one that the Fed, government and banks ultimately create or adopt is the one that will have long term success beyond just "if we buy now the value might go up and we might be rich!". You can be certain that whatever virtual currency governments decide to adopt the majority of the market cap will not be owned and controlled by your average everyday joe blows with the best mining rigs who can crash the value when they dumps all their coins.

>reddit
? I've browsed reddit one time in my entire life. What else are you going to tell me about me?

>>220311
All value is derived from speculation. The Bitcoin network is one of its strengths. You can copy the code, but you can't copy the network. It is just the same as Google or whatever other company making their own social network, but Facebook is still the king for now.

>>220297
>>220304
market is getting waterlogged we're going to need a catalyst to drive in liquidity and when that happens bitcoins next path will reveal itself.

look at the daily from the last boom/bust bitcoin had when it first touched 250ish. there was a long well established cup and handle right before it took off too 1.2k. Its basic market psychology.

>>220317
>All value is derived from speculation

b-but muh intrinsic value!

Carl Menger subjective theory of value fistbump

>>220317
>All value is derived from speculation
Semi-correct. Obviously supply and demand play a role but you already know this. What I mean is that whether it be a service or product there is usually a basis for market caps (revenue, sales, earnings reports). If there is someone willing to manufacture a product cheaper or can make it better then it breeds competition. If someone is willing to provide a service and is can do it for less or can do it better then it breeds competition. In the great scheme of things Google struck the search engine market early and provided a service that many people found useful and did it well. The reason there isn't too much competition anymore (there was at one point) is that people as a whole are satisfied with what Google provides. If there was a rival that suddenly sprung up that made searches better or more efficient then Google would either have to evolve or concede some if not all of it's market percentage.

Bitcoin on the other hand provides a service that is actually quite generic and as technology continues to evolve there will probably be dozens of technologies that will improve the way that money is handled. The point is that BTC isn't some tin-silver-copper alloy that you can patent so that nobody else can encroach on your idea. The code is open source and BTC protocol itself can be cloned and improved on (it needs it). This means that a bank, company, government or organization doesn't need BTC to break into the virtual currency space and people in general will follow what ever is mainstream and pushed by the powers that be.

>>220254

bitcoin has no law regarding itself and it does not look like it will gain one in the forseeable future

>>220266

Macchiavelli stated, that if you want to fight fairly with the unfair, then be prepared to lose fast

>tfw i have an image from 2011 or 2012 with the mtgox price at $7 which I made to make fun of people's crashed BTC

>>220372
The law of bitcoin is the protocol. Do you think statist laws are permanent and objective? Legislators change laws all the time, and agencies like FinCEN aren't even accountable to voters (not to imply that legislators are either). If people don't like a change in Bitcoin, they can fork it and then if enough people like the fork they will support it.

I said before that even if someone copied the code of Bitcoin, they couldn't copy the network. There are plenty of other english anonymous imageboards, but 4chan is still the most active because of network effect. When someone starts using Bitcoin, 4chan, or any other type of network service they get not only the benefit of whatever the service is but they also get the benefit of all the other users.

>>220350

>This means that a bank, company, government or organization doesn't need BTC to break into the virtual currency space and people in general will follow what ever is mainstream and pushed by the powers that be.

Well, the banks, companies and government will just need to unseat Bitcoin with a superior product, and more people that agree to use it as a store of value. I don't see how anyone would disagree with that.

What we know is that the largest, most distributed, fastest supercomputing network in history has been cryptographically securing and processing transactions of non-counterfietable tokens instantaneously across the globe for five years -- and that these tokens are valued by people at about 600x the dollar.

The liquidity pool any given day seems to be about $50-100 million USD, and growing. The adoption curve as measured by an admittedly crude "new web wallets" standard continues to skyrocket. This shows all the signs of a chasm-crossing market leader.

What I haven't been able to figure out in this thread is why you think your speculation is any different from those people who would say BTC will be worth $1m?

If you're speculating that there might be some other cryptocurrency that might take significant market share away from Bitcoin, then that's fine but you're just as guilty as magic crystal ball predictions as the next guy.

>>220383
Even if someone else comes up with a better currency, as long as it is open source as well, whatever improvements it makes over Bitcoin can be added to Bitcoin itself. If the new currency is closed source, its improvements would have to even greater for people to migrate since the majority of Bitcoin users are anti-proprietary software.

>>220383
>why you think your speculation is any different from those people who would say BTC will be worth $1m
What speculation? I never gave any specific value for a future BTC market cap because honestly I don't think anyone knows. Too many variables are involved and BTC has no central authority so no one specific entity has control. I merely gave input as to what is possible and not possible within reason. A $1m value per BTC is not even remotely possible. See my earlier posts as to why. It doesn't matter though because even if I could hypothetically provide you with an in depth analysis that charts amount of Bitcoin miners, average cost of mining rigs, hashrates, BTC difficulty levels, trading volumes, buy walls that show incontrovertible evidence that BTC will never peak past a certain point, Bitcoin fanatics are so immune to reason that they would rather gouge their eyes out than look at it. Even if the value of Bitcoin tanked to $100 per BTC or less there will still be diehards holding on for years waiting for it to hit that million dollar mark. It's insane. You guys are almost cult-ish in your enthusiasm.

>>220055
>being this mad at missing the bubble
You had the opportunity of a lifetime to become rich, it was named Bitcoin, now it's too late. That's that.

>>220391
But if BTC's aspiration is to become a legit currency it means it needs to go mainstream, and mainstream doesn't give a fuck about propietary software or muh freedoms (Windows is and will be king)

>>220813
yfw the opportunity will never pass as the biggest bubble is still to come

>>217827
>b-b-but
> muh currency.

Consider suicide. For fuck sake, you sound like every annoying faggot on the internet with your faggot ass long over opinionated bullshit theories and gay meme speak. Go back to 9gag faggot.

>>220372
>bitcoin has no law regarding itself and it does not look like it will gain one in the forseeable future

Sure about that?

http://www.examiner.com/article/take-notes-colorado-california-just-passed-law-making-bitcoins-legal-money

http://pando.com/2014/03/12/moving-on-up-bitcoin-gets-a-boost-as-new-york-opens-applications-for-virtual-currency-exchange-licenses/

This is going to be adopted.

>>220813
bitcoins market cap is like 1/4th of what twitter is valued at (40bn, i believe)

if you dont think bitcoin has any more room to grow you're insane.

bitcoin is still extremely tiny compared to something like visa, and yet that's who they will be competing with.

>>216879
>has a lambo
>can't spell scenario
fucking kill me already

>>221788
Its not his lambo, read the timestamp you fucking retard...and even if it was today, don't believe someone from biz has a lambo. How fucking stupid can you be?

>>221920
>Its not his lambo, read the timestamp you fucking retard...and even if it was today, don't believe

It is common knowledge that this was the first ever supercar bought with crypto. It made national headlines, you dense motherfucker.

>>221975
>>221975
>>221975
You might want to consider who you are calling dense you fucking moron. I know what the fuck it is, this picture has shown up hundreds of times in dozens of other forms. You might want to read my comment a few more times, and then person whom I was replying to, and think for a second before you make yourself look like a fucking retard. You literaly reiterated my point with your comment, then called me dense. For fucks sake. Consider suicide.

>>220813
Wrong
>>220901
Wrong
>>221081
Reading comprehension. I said that out of jest to mock people who say BTC will ever be taken seriously as a currency
>>221499
>http://www.examiner.com/article/take-notes-colorado-california-just-passed-law-making-bitcoins-legal-money
Wrong. Bitcoin shills like to use this to say that BTC is now legal tender in CA but all the bill says is that they wont prohibit people from making alternative currencies. Big difference.
>>221537
>if you dont think bitcoin has any more room to grow you're insane
>tiny compared to something like visa, and yet that's who they will be competing with
lmao Visa? Yikes I don't even know what to say to that.

>>222018
I know you said it out of jest, you dumb nigger. Thats why you look like a faggot, because you sound like every other fedora wearing athiest neckbeard redditor trying to prove your shitty opinion mocking other people with your hip ironic meme talk

>>222034
Umm... That's the joke

>>222016
>You literaly reiterated my point with your comment, then called me dense. For fucks sake. Consider suicide.

So let's say that you had done exactly what you just accused me of doing; Would you think considering suicide as a legitimate option?

That seems a little extreme to me.