[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 168 KB, 640x480, PepeCurrency.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4833872 No.4833872 [Reply] [Original]

Question for all the nocoiners and 'its a bubble' people, I think we all claim to be reasonable. You guys always have a lot of reasons for why bitcoin will fail:

>Transactions fees/time
>(((blockstream)))
>Dragonslayer
>Tulip mania
>CME short
>Tether scam

And so on, now this is not a debate about how legitimate these concerns/claims are, a lot of them have validity. My question is: a lot of us believe bitcoin will overcome all of these obstacles, that it will not crash, that it will just have minor corrections and keep going up etc, is there a hypothetical point at which you will accept that we are right?

If it crashes, then great, you guys are right. But is there a price at which you will finally accept that this really is 'the paradigm shit' humanity has waited millennia for, and that this is not an asset in a bubble, this is a network with inherently value etc. Or will you just keep moving the goalposts saying a crash is imminent and bitcoin is a bubble? I just feel that to be fair you guys need to establish a price at which you will just accept that bitcoin, despite all its flaws, is the final universal currency, that it won't be supplanted by an altcoin with better tech, etc. It can be a very high price and unlikely price obviously.

>> No.4833930

>>4833872

BTC cannot exist with 1mb blocks forever my dude. Something which is more cost effective and efficient will replace it.

>> No.4834010

>>4833872
sage bitcoin

>> No.4834134

>>4833930

Ok, let's say that is what will happen in 99.99999% of universes. Now there is a small chance you're in the universe where that doesn't happen, where somehow bitcoin solves its scaling issues with 1mb blocks etc. At what price would you believe you're in that universe?

I guess my point is every argument should be falsifiable, every claim must have conditions in which that claim can be evaluated as wrong. So whenever people say 'bitcoin cannot succeed' or 'bitcoin WILL be replaced', I think it's intellectually dishonest to not establish conditions under which your claim can be proven wrong. Otherwise you're just always moving the goalposts.