a 51% attack has a small chance to undo a spend that was done just in last hour

It can alter or reverse transfers as long as it’s going on.

IOUs based on a “trust me bro its still there asset” is not as good as IOU based on bitcoin

That would be better actually, because there might be a real thing somewhere which the writer of the IOU will give the bearer upon demand. Bitcoin is “Thanks for the $97,430.23 bro trust me bro someone will give you that much or more for that ledger entry in money, goods, or services bro I swear bro because it’s scarce bro”.

The argument that you need to convince bakers in your new country to accept bitcoin is not real. But its easier than gold, tulips, or other currency, or land deed in civil war country. Replace baker with someone on craigslist, and its still easier.

Yeah, today it is easier, because it’s bolstered by drug dealers, nerds, and speculators who do their day-to-day living mostly in USD. But in 30 years? I’m not psychic, but I’m guessing that drug dealers will switch to more privacy-focused systems, (tech) nerds will switch to more technologically interesting systems, speculators will find other things to speculate on, and the…right-libertarian nerds might keep the network humming along at a much lower valuation if they don’t all collapse in existential horror at the price drop.

You’re arguing here that paying with Bitcoin is bad for the payer because value is certain to go up.

“Certain” is an overstatement, but yeah, you can’t really use a deflationary money, because it makes more sense to hold it. Money, as a medium of exchange, needs to be stable, erring on the side of inflation. Bitcoin is bad at being money.

That means it’s good for the buyer/receiver, which makes it easier if you need something physical/consumable from your “wealth”.

That’s the theory, but aside from being no way to create an economy, it doesn’t follow IRL does it? People aren’t exactly clamoring for my Bitcoin. My inflationary dollars are far more in demand.

Bank panics/failures are frequent serious enough that the system relies on bailouts for them. And yet the system works. Neither I nor my parents have ever lost money from a bank failure. Despite some of our banks having failed. Meanwhile the Bitcoin I bought when I started typing this is now…$96,990.40. I’ve lost a month’s groceries doing nothing.

USD has no relevance to value of bitcoin.

And yet even the ASICs I can buy with Bitcoin, like the beer I once bought with Bitcoin, all describe their prices foremost in USD. Because that’s mostly what it’s actually bought with, and sold for.

You know, blockchains are neat and by virtue of that Bitcoin is neat. But there’s nothing particularly good about it, and it’s rife with flaws. Its principles are flawed, and it’s not backed up by anything but hopes and dreams. It’s a fun thing to gamble with, but there are more interesting blockchains, and no blockchains are mature enough to be really anything more than just fun to mess with.

The jewelry and industrial value of gold is minimal to its reserve value.

Yes, but it provides a lower limit to the value. The lower limit of the value of a mark on a given distributed ledger is nil. Also most of your points are general to all blockchains, not particular to Bitcoin, which has problems specific to its protocol and the choices made at its inception.

1. proof, security, and cheapness of reserves including greater protection from war pillage.

Sorta? Proof: Gold exists. You just have it. I’m not sure how much “harder” it is to prove that a physical thing is what it appears to be than it is to prove that a particular cryptographic signature is validated for a particular distributed ledger by the consensus processing power of said ledger. Security: Eh? Digital currencies are stolen all the time, remotely. Theoretically one could make a very strong passphrase that would be virtually impossible to crack before the heat death of the universe, but in practice most passwords aren’t that strong and remote attacks are easy to iterate, while physical things take effort to get to and gold is heavy as shit. Plus. a determined and energy-rich actor could shoot for a 51% attack without sending a single troop across a border. Same for war pillage.

2. Cheaper and secure transactions. war, piracy, shipwreck proof. Divisibility is also a transactional advantage.

Most physical goods that are treated as stores of value are functionally rai stones. That’s basically what money is. It doesn’t matter where something physically is, but rather how do the parties to the transactions understand the exchange. And I mean, if a pirate steals your doubloons, he gets caught and hanged, or they are repossessed at the point of a gun from whoever he traded them to on the black markets, etc. If a hacker cracks your key, you can maybe find him, maybe not. If you find him you can hit him with a wrench until he transfers the numbers back to you, but if he expires first you’re SOL. Divisibility in Bitcoin is meaningless. State-issued currencies can be divided to whatever fraction the issuers deem necessary. Bitcoin particularly is hard-capped at a satoshi.

3. wealth escape options, including banking/sovereign failure and sanctions.

These are all social constructions. A sovereign state says you “own” a 100-acre plot of land. You “sell” half for some quantity of Bitcoin. The state later fails and some polite but armed people come and tell you all 100 acres are theirs now and if you give them trouble they will use a tool called a “gun” to make little pieces of metal called “bullets” poke holes in your head until you are no longer what could reasonably be described as “alive”. So with your passphrase in your head (and no new holes) you leave. Where do you go? Somewhere where there are other nerds who will take your distributed ledger units in exchange for the necessities of life (or a local currency with which to procure the same), but what do they get in exchange, really? A promise of labor? Nah, you’re Bitcoin “rich”. “Rights” to the land you just left? Nope, the gentlemen with the guns have that. All they get…is Bitcoin, which is only worth whatever the faithful believe it is worth, or what a state or state-like actor tells you it’s worth by the barrel of a gun.

4. Cryptographic applications and protocol extensions including layer 2.

Apples and oranges when speaking of gold, USD, and other mediums of exchange, but yeah blockchains are cool and interesting and even potentially useful in their own right.

other crypto networks depend on bitcoin.

That’s.just.false.

5. Better “tokenomics” than gold.

Is it though? Is it “better”? Bitcoin specifically, as I think I mentioned before, insofar as it is an “asset” at all, is deflationary, which makes it a lousy medium of exchange. You’re basically saying that the supply of gold (or other material mediums of exchange) can increase, as if it’s a bad thing. Stability of value (something Bitcoin still lacks) is a good quality in an asset to be sure. Deflation on the other hand is just wealth transferring to someone for not doing anything. Essentially economic rent. Gold is generally deflationary too, but that’s a problem it shares with the Bitcoin ledger. The little bit of potential increased production of gold around the margins isn’t even a bad thing.

6. You don’t need to rely on counter party bank not declaring bankruptcy for next 3 days.

This isn’t a common problem in stable nation-states, though in a war zone or active coup sure, a passphrase might be easier to secure.

You can buy bitcoin miners in bitcoin.

I bought beer with Bitcoin once. Buying things with Bitcoin is neat. But…can the factory that makes the ASICs buy the components with Bitcoin? Can the component manufacturers buy their materials with Bitcoin? Do all the workers down to the miners of rare-earth minerals take their wages in Bitcoin? Then pay their rent and buy their groceries with Bitcoin? No I think they use their local currencies. I expect even the ASIC resellers mostly have to sell their Bitcoin for legal tender before then use that legal tender to purchase…things. And for any given nation-state, the collapse of that state would probably impact the value of Bitcoin negatively relative to the level of investment from the people. If the USA goes Mad Max (Australian setting, I know), even put aside the computers and network access needed to maintain a blockchain (other countries exist, etc), what is the impact of the evaporation of all the USD which were use to acquire BTC on the exchange rate for said BTC in the still-existing nations? Do you think all the Bitcoin rich American refugees crossing into Canada and Mexico are gonna get more poutine/fajitas per satoshi than before the collapse? Less? About the same? Come on now.

Fractional banking is the real other ponzi scheme

ftfy

Bitcoin will always be protection from financial collapse/decline.

Like any other fiat currency, blockchain currencies (including Bitcoin) rely on faith and credit. USD derives its value from the USA’s ability to swing its dick around internationally. Gold derives its value from speculation + (utility * rarity). Blockchain currencies, separate from their ability to be converted to state-issued currencies, derive their value from the full-faith-and-credit of nerds.

Bitcoin isn’t gold or oil.

Gold is a thing. It has some utility. You can make other things with it. You can reprocess it into different things.

Oil is a thing. It can be burned as fuel, or made into other things.

Bitcoin is a ledger protocol with limited entries. It is good for peer-to-peer transfer of cash, and speculation. The speculation aspect is a pyramid scheme though, as it’s only backed by the hope that people keep paying more for the ledger spaces, which undermines its function as a medium of exchange, and is unlikely to last as alternative ledgers are abundant, including those that are better suited for private exchange like Monero or ZCash.

Lacking intrinsic value, the only reason to create a strategic reserve of Bitcoin is like that of any other foreign currency. So, market manipulation? A lack of stability in your own currency (but Bitcoin is mostly USD backed)? International exchange (but USD and Euros are better)?

There will never be a default on US debt unless it’s by choice. US debt is in US dollars, which the US makes. There will be inflation. Goods may end up being exchanged in another national or international currency someday. It won’t be Bitcoin.

If it won’t get you in trouble, throw some cheap lawn ornaments up as well. Maybe get creative with loose hubcaps.

It’s not precise. A shelter is just that: shelter, not a home. An apartment can be a home, but is not a house.

Yeah but bluesky isn’t that.

This is a great idea I think, but part of the problem with science versus programming is that they’re just very different social environments, so the expectations, norms, and demands on each are very different.

Dependent down a little bit more, most research is done by people with phds or other advanced degrees (or pursuing them) in an academic job, and one of the conditions of attaining or maintaining that job is publishing. And these are the same people doing the peer reviews.

I think what this creates, even aside from the overwhelming volume and complexity of work, is a certain amount of grace amongst academics. That is, I think a fair number of peer reviewers are not only failing to rigorously grapple with the material that they review, but because of the small social mileux and shared incentives, they are incentivized to not be very rigorous in many cases.

Not saying peer review is without value, but how harshly would you want to challenge or critique the work of someone whom you may work alongside or under in the future?

A candidate who couldn’t make it to the first primary in her last campaign for this position too! I felt what I could only describe as “meta-unease” about her.

If I felt so unmotivated, how uninspired was everyone else?

Also I think the racial rhetoric from the Dems is turning some Black voters off.

If things are going my way, it’s God’s prophecies (as interpreted by me) fulfilled.

If things are not going my way, it’s God punishing us for not doing things my way.

Also: if a natural disaster hurts people I don’t like, they’re being punished by God. If it hurts me, God is just testing me.

I wish the US had spent its efforts and resources towards completely eliminating the Taliban as an institution and ideology rather than kind of shoveling money around to opportunists with no skills for organizing people or maintaining loyalty. I think what happened instead was that the US was afraid of sparking a new movement that would eventually operate outside of its control so it funded what it thought it could control: rich assholes.

And now the religious fascists are back in charge. Wheee.

Just because they’re conservative doesn’t mean they’re publishing falsehoods. Just be on the lookout for bias, which you should for all media.

For example, the oppression of women in Afghanistan is probably being reported on more by conservative sources not because they are against the oppression of women, but because they’re hawks who disagreed with leaving Afghanistan, and there’s probably some anti-muslim sentiment motivating it as well. Likewise liberal media sources are probably ignoring it because leaving Afghanistan the way America did was largely considered to be a disaster which was finalized under a Democratic administration, and for all their talk of caring about women they did basically abandon half the population of an entire nation. It would probably not help their side of the current election cycle to shine light on the catastrophic fallout of one of Biden’s major international policy decisions.

I hope these IDF soldiers wake up. You can’t kill people without killing part of yourself.

This is basically Objectivism.

Wouldn’t it be cool if people who committed violent acts couldn’t actually be traumatized by those acts if they were unambiguously immoral. If people who did Evil were always consciously aware of it. If there was a moral order to the universe manifested in our bodies and in our works. One could then be sure that anyone who committed an act of evil and reported being traumatized by it was really lying.

Everyone has a choice.

There’s no such thing as a “correct” people to erase.

I hate Twitter, but I’m getting to the point where I want it to get better because if bluesky gets many more members we’re just gonna have Twitter again.

One thing I liked about the Muskification of Twitter was the scattering.

I’m pretty sure I’ve lived on less than this in inflation adjusted dollars.

Oh I don’t think it’s a problem for Discord, but when it comes to software projects specifically I find the reliance on Discord frustrating because of its non-public orientation. If I’m having an issue I’d far rather search for a solution on a public wiki, bug report system, or forum than sign up for one more Discord server.

Far more than should tbh. Too many little game mods will have a Discord for questions and reporting issues rather than using their GitHub or a forum.

I think you’re giving the guy too much credit. Sometimes things are as they seen. He just didn’t like the moderation scheme on Twitter, made a gesture buying it, fumbled a little bit and overbid, then after having been forced to acquire it tried to turn it into something closer to what he wanted it to be.