I don't mean to lecture, I just was adding some speculation as it's an area I think about a lot. I don't own any bitcoin but i'm an austrian schooled economist and I understand the arguments for decentralized money - and I argue for a gold standard. The problem with bitcoin has no underlying value as it's not a commidity, plus there are no rational actors when the miners run out of hashes. The blockchain is an immutable receipt that specify that you own this thing, which doesn't require a bank as the middle man, so you are the bank.
Also this currency that the Fed and other central banks are looking to create is not bitcoin, but a slave digital currency. There is no way they can implement a new centralized currency using bitcoin. it just doesn't work for Central Banks that need to rev up the quantities whenever they want.
I agree on a lot of the points - i didn't think you are a shill. The fact that bitcoin has no instrinsic value means it will at some point be worth 0. It's acting similar to other bubbles in history like tulips or beanie babies. At least with tulips you actually have a tulip at the end of the day.
It should be an inherent assumption with bitcoin, or any digitization of assets that will require the internet, but it would be harder for the cabal to control - or at least to the same degree to what they can achieve under a fiat system. Under a decentralized system, the cabal hates it because there isn't the artificial growth that is prevalent with inflation, and it benefits the saver as opposed to debtors.
I think the cabal has been trying to control it ever since they announced the bitcoin futures market, which was responsible for the first big drop. I don't think it has been that succesful until recently with China and the IRS announcements but I'm watching as a casual observer.
I wasn't as much singling out crypto - but a reserve currency they can't control. I don't think they can operate in a system where there are rules for an asset to be created out of thin air.
Proof of Stake is the ultimate form of control imo. Who owns the most tokens essentially governs the network (control).
Proof of Work on the other hand takes a tremendous amount of energy, still a fraction of the shit show that is War etc.
The hash migration is super interesting, it could be that most of that will get back online situated in the US.
ETH heading to PoS will make Vitalik a very. Very rich dude. Who knows, maybe the cabal is steering him. Sort of like Zuckerberg. Also isn’t it interesting the Ethereum alumni are all involved in the other large blockchain projects?
I can’t quite figure out Hoskinson though, he’s quite libertarian … but Cardano is gearing up control Africa. Think about it, Why would anyone need their school grades to be on a blockchain?
I don't mean to lecture, I just was adding some speculation as it's an area I think about a lot. I don't own any bitcoin but i'm an austrian schooled economist and I understand the arguments for decentralized money - and I argue for a gold standard. The problem with bitcoin has no underlying value as it's not a commidity, plus there are no rational actors when the miners run out of hashes. The blockchain is an immutable receipt that specify that you own this thing, which doesn't require a bank as the middle man, so you are the bank.
Also this currency that the Fed and other central banks are looking to create is not bitcoin, but a slave digital currency. There is no way they can implement a new centralized currency using bitcoin. it just doesn't work for Central Banks that need to rev up the quantities whenever they want.
I agree on a lot of the points - i didn't think you are a shill. The fact that bitcoin has no instrinsic value means it will at some point be worth 0. It's acting similar to other bubbles in history like tulips or beanie babies. At least with tulips you actually have a tulip at the end of the day.
It should be an inherent assumption with bitcoin, or any digitization of assets that will require the internet, but it would be harder for the cabal to control - or at least to the same degree to what they can achieve under a fiat system. Under a decentralized system, the cabal hates it because there isn't the artificial growth that is prevalent with inflation, and it benefits the saver as opposed to debtors.
I think the cabal has been trying to control it ever since they announced the bitcoin futures market, which was responsible for the first big drop. I don't think it has been that succesful until recently with China and the IRS announcements but I'm watching as a casual observer.
I wasn't as much singling out crypto - but a reserve currency they can't control. I don't think they can operate in a system where there are rules for an asset to be created out of thin air.
Proof of Stake is the ultimate form of control imo. Who owns the most tokens essentially governs the network (control).
Proof of Work on the other hand takes a tremendous amount of energy, still a fraction of the shit show that is War etc.
The hash migration is super interesting, it could be that most of that will get back online situated in the US.
ETH heading to PoS will make Vitalik a very. Very rich dude. Who knows, maybe the cabal is steering him. Sort of like Zuckerberg. Also isn’t it interesting the Ethereum alumni are all involved in the other large blockchain projects?
I can’t quite figure out Hoskinson though, he’s quite libertarian … but Cardano is gearing up control Africa. Think about it, Why would anyone need their school grades to be on a blockchain?
Great Firewall of Chy-na!