>>17259637
>0xBTC
this a thousand times.
i remain in absolute disbelief to this day that there are actual human beings that come to /biz/ and unironically think 0xBTC has any chance of being even remotely relevant in 2 years time
it is truly freakish to me that i post in the same place as someone who can rationalize that thought process
I honestly thought it was all a joke, and the devs pumping and dumping but these anons come out in full force and cite examples and push the notion of a "smart contract enabled BTC" and it fucking terrifies me how gullible and uninformed people truly are on here. fuck i get embarassed even thinking about it