> P.S. Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto.<p>LOL<p>No wonder this guy is salty. For perspective, Craig Wright-is-Satoshi acolytes believe that “BSV” (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision), which is dying and in fact nearly dead, is the true Bitcoin and that the mainstream BTC is a fork.<p>This also explains why the entire lengthy article never mentioned the lightning network which facilitates micropayments beautifully.
> the public believes the best use case for Bitcoin is to not use it. This counterintuitive idea has nothing to do with the vision for Bitcoin described in the original white paper. Bitcoin is intended to be used, not just held.<p>> How come the only use case seems to be a dishonest pyramid scheme?<p>Because the fixed supply encourages hoarding.<p>If bitcoin wanted to encourage use over holding, it should have done without the reward halvings. Just have a fixed reward, i.e. a pure linear emission. Now it takes n years to get yearly supply inflation down to 1/n.
This vastly reduces the fear of missing out and speculation, while encouraging use as a currency.
"This is a brand problem and has nothing to do with technology. "<p>This I would question. Clearly btc was modeled on the production of a physical commodity. It was not designed to operate like money, but like a goldbug's fantasy of money. The result was not an accident, it was inevitable.
I find it curious that no mention is made of the enormous amount of energy required to mine bitcoin. I can't reconcile how with such high costs for equipment and electricity and the slowness/cost in verifying transactions that bitcoin could be used for micropayments. Anybody care to explain?
I know someone who went all-in on Blockfi to get yields. They went all-in on crypto b/c their uncle made a bunch of money in crypto during the run up.<p>Well, hopefully their uncle can also bail them out ... they lost all their money. Over half a million dollars (!!!!!!!!)