Best products from r/Buttcoin

We found 59 comments on r/Buttcoin discussing the most recommended products. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 86 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

Top comments mentioning products on r/Buttcoin:

u/Capt_Roger_Murdock · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

>The value of something is affected by:

>1. how many people want that thing and how much they want it
>2. how easily those people can get access to that thing

I'd say that "value" is subjective. But sure, the price of something is determined by the intersection of supply and demand. There is a certain amount of demand for money because it's a useful thing. But an IOU for money is not guaranteed to be treated by the market as money. Back to my example with Sue and Mike, Sue might try to pay with a $5 IOU issued by the Bank of Mr._Deep_Research, but that doesn't mean Mike will accept it, or accept it at full face value. Mike might say, "I'll credit you $4 for that IOU to cover the risk of default I'm exposing myself to" (which Sue might find unacceptable). Or he might say "sorry, I have no idea how to value that IOU. That's not my line of business. Redeem it and come back with cash, or sell it for cash to someone else who does know how to value it." Our central banking system where almost all money is debt and there exists a "lender of last resort" (really a "printer of first resort"), and where there are these implicit and explicit government guarantees backing up these highly-regulated banks, has created a situation where people don't perceive there to be any risk associated with holding bank IOUs such that they're indifferent between cash and bank checkbook money. (Indeed, they mostly prefer the latter given the difficulties of safely storing large amounts of paper currency, and the huge limitations associated with using physical cash for payments.) But the government intervention involved here didn't eliminate the inherent risk associated with debt-based money. To the contrary, they grew it and made it systemic.

>An infinite number of times. How much money can I create? I can create a whole economy. And that is exactly what banking is. Exactly.

Sure, in theory. Let's say that you loan that original $10 in physical currency to Alice through Zack and they all redeposit it with you. So now your balance sheet has, on the asset side, $10 physical currency plus 26 notes for $10 each that are repayable over some specified period of time with some specified amount of interest. And on the liabilities side you've got $260 payable-on-demand deposits. No problem, right? Well until several of your borrowers start defaulting on their loans and more than one of your depositors shows up to withdraw their funds.

>The "fractional reserve" is not something banks are given as a benefit or a form of lending itself. In my example, there is no fractional reserve.

Not sure what definition you're using. Here's what I come up with: "Fractional reserve banking is a system in which only a fraction of bank deposits are backed by actual cash on hand and available for withdrawal." As soon as your on-demand deposits went from $10 to $20 (despite your only having $10 in cash in your vault), you began operating on a fractional reserve basis.

>We don't have to have anything to have banking. You could be a bank for your friends. Just get them to keep their money with you, make loans to them, charge some interest so you make some money and you are good to go. Lend the same money out over and over. Would your friends go for that? No deposit insurance. No lender of last resort. No fractional reserve restriction.

No, they probably wouldn't go for that. But they might if I offered a high enough interest rate to borrow their money. And then I could presumably try to turn a profit by lending it out to other credit-worthy borrowers for a higher interest rate. It wouldn't make much sense for me to agree that my friends' deposits would be payable on demand though given the potential this would create for a "bank run"-type scenario. (I would rarely have much cash on hand as I would be lending most of it out. Thus, if a significant minority showed up demanding they be allowed to withdraw their deposits immediately, I could be in real trouble.) The key point is that IOUs from me in this scenario are unlikely to be widely-accepted as money equivalents.

>Yeah, that's why we have a Fed and banking regulations. And that's what caused the Great Depression in the U.S. in the 20s.

If you're saying that the Federal Reserve (created in 1913) was responsible for instigating the Great Depression, then yes, I'd agree.

>Butters generally think the fractional reserve is some kind of magical thing that creates money because they have no idea how money or the economy operates.

I don't know what that means. Fractional reserve isn't "magical." But the problems associated with an elastic money supply and central bank manipulation of the price of credit are very real. Recommended reading: Paper Money Collapse: The Folly of Elastic Money.

u/jimmajamma · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

> I don't know the details either. But, since it mixes your coins with those of other people, who is going to pay whom? Don't you all have to pay to some entity that arranges the match?

https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket

> There is no Ligtning Network on the horizon, and I see no reason to hope that there will be.

Indications to the contrary: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5hvjua/whats_going_on_with_lightning_network/db3dg3a/

> And, again, you would be receiving fees for the service of relaying payments, not for holding the bitcoins. Just as the miners get paid for confirming transactions.

As I understand it, you make fees for creating liquidity which requires bitcoin the asset.

> The bitcoin currency is an extremely abstract entity, that cannot even be exhibited on a screen.

Huh? Are you just using this conversation as a propaganda FUD tool?

When I look at my online bank balance it shows "$xx,xxx", same for by bitcoin wallet. That's not abstract.

> The bitcoin currency was created by Satoshi only because he could not design a trustless network to transmit dollars or euros.

This is pure bullshit. "Chancellor on the brink of bailouts...." He sought to create an uncontrolled asset.

> You missed the point completely. Investing in stocks and holding them is NOT AT ALL like investing in bitcoins and holding them. If you don't see the difference, it is no wonder that you can't see why buying bitcoin is not investment,but gambling.

You laid out 2 scenarios, in both you lose all your money. If your point is that hoarding is different than investing in stocks then yes there is a difference, but bitcoin is different from stocks in many ways, and similar too. You also say "The utility is in the currency flow -- the payment system -- not the currency itself" to which I say, the markets say differently. You also have failed to account for capital flight which is not a "payment flow" but an acquire, move and perhaps sell which requires the asset, not just some asset. Again you are trying to separate the payment network from the asset which you cannot do.

> estimated to cost hundreds of millions of dollars per year in ransom, and cause many times that amount of losses to businesses and individuals.

This may be true, but freedom comes with a cost. If this is the price for truly free trade, its'a bargain. Seems like the upside is people will start to practice better security and backup polcies.

> Most uses are legitimate and beneficial to society, so that their balance is massively positive.

> There is not much data, but

... insert subjective statement to suit your preconceived notion. Let's chalk this up to political differences. You worship the state and central control and planning, I don't.


> Why would they choose one that is a lot less stable than those, and which may lose all its value tomorrow?

Now fallacy yet again, and they might choose it for capital flight as carrying large amounts of cash is much more precarious.

> The markets said that Madoff's ponzi was one of the best and more secure investments around. For 30 years.

The markets or just a private group of investors that didn't do any due diligence? Gold -> thousands of years.


> But what has actually improved for the users since 2009?

This is a dumb metric. The thing just works and the one major issue is scale which is actively being worked on from here:

Segwit, which includes linear scaling of sighash operations, malleability fixes, reducing the amount of data required by the signature generator and a large 110% onchain capacity increase

Libsecp256k1, which improved signature validation speeds by c7x

A mempool limiting option mode for nodes

Blocks only mode for nodes

Reducing upload traffic

Compact blocks

Opt in RBF - helping the sender increase the priority of transactions

CPFP - helping the receiver increase the priority of transactions

Continued work on the development of LN and payment channel technology

Headers first

Pruned mode

etc.

> bitcoin user experience today is A LOT worse than it was 2 years ago

Funny, in hundreds of transactions I've only ever experienced a single 2 block delay. I'm betting there is a lot less spam though taking up your precious 96GB.

> Suuure. So small that it can fit in the feature phone of any peasant in Burkina Faso. Even Luke Dash Jr can almost keep up with it, almost.

You apparently missed the part about the pruning nodes. Why would a peasant need the entire chain? Oh that's right, this is just about spreading FUD.

https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Memory-Standard-Packaging-SDSDUNC-128G-GN6IN/dp/B0143IISD0%3Fpsc%3D1%26SubscriptionId%3DAKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q%26tag%3Dduckduckgo-d-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3DB0143IISD0

> The blockchain design cannot handle that "required" growth

That's where layer 2 comes in.

> the block size would at least let the system function as it was designed

It was designed to be decentralized. IMO Core's wise to see the threat of evolving bitcoin to Paypal 2.0/Fiatcoin.

> A nomenclature note

I call you butters. Better names might be wall flowers, state worshipers, disruption deniers, shills, bitcoin enviers...

> If what we write (here or in your churches) can divide your community,

I didn't say you "can", but you do "try".

> That is how we got the "Fork of July", SegWit, RBF, CPFP -- and the "fee market" deployed before any "layer 2" network was even vaguely designed.

As I understood it, SegWit, RBF are prereqs and it seems the LN plan is pretty well laid out. Gavin didn't seem competent to me (as a professional software developer myself). He always seemed flippant and indecisive. You didn't respond on the 20MB block idea of his among other things. I try to respond point for point.

> 1) fuck the non-mining relay nodes,

So fuck decentralization then?

What I'm seeing here is that you take every possible negative position on bitcoin. You have nothing positive to say about it despite it at the very least solving a number of interesting and never before solved problems, decentralized trust, permissionless transactions and innovation, brilliant security incentivization. There are undeniable positives like the ability to back up your assets (can't do that with any other asset), send transactions without exposing the keys (as with credit cards) yet you are dismissive based on your other one-sided opinions and forgone conclusions. The market is wrong, everyone who uses it is an idiot, even if it succeeds for decades it will be a failure. That's quite a position.

Maybe it's just that like Professor Bitcorn you stuck your neck out too far too soon and now, rather than eat some crow, be a big man and admit you probably spoke too soon, you are too stubborn and prefer instead to continue to fight and deny and worst of all, to influence those that might have otherwise been early adopters. I'm seeing a lot of reports along those lines here: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/5lkw6q/bitcoin_jumps_above_1000_for_first_time_in_three/?st=IXGBU8NB&sh=e3e1f5f5

It think it might be time for some reflection. Even skepticism is better in moderation.

u/coinaday · 3 pointsr/Buttcoin

> I don't claim to know what a solution to the problem is, but I'm relatively certain if you asked the vast majority of people under 35 about putting their money in stocks, bonds, or CDs they'd have no idea how to do that. I want to say high schools should teach basic financial skills like budgeting, saving for retirement, investing, and most importantly the risk assessment that goes with that. Unfortunately, I suspect that teaching students that would potentially open schools to litigation when some students inevitably failed hard at the risk assessment and put their eggs all in one basket(i.e. anyone who takes out mortgage loans to buy Butts or stock in that awesome new company that's going to the moon...Enron).

I think schools should teach that stuff. I got a basic introduction to stocks and bonds and such from a personal interest as well as my grandfather, who subscribed to Barron's which I got to enjoy reading a bit myself as a result and who bought low cost index funds. My schools also did have a little bit of exposure to it as well which I certainly enjoyed too.

The bottom line that having a low cost / low fee approach and using index funds to get the market return over a long period of time is essentially the safest and most reliable choice for most people is important, and people should be taught as much more as they'd like to know about why that is and how to go further if they want.

Also, I highly recommend people play Capitalism II (non-ref Amazon link; also available on gog) ; it's definitely a bit dated at this point, but I think it still holds up really well and it's a surprisingly solid introduction to basic business and investing concepts for a video game. Definitely worthwhile learning material as well as a lot of fun in my opinion.

u/THE_CHILD_OF_GOD · 2 pointsr/Buttcoin

Your last line is the point. I'm not saying we shouldn't innovate our payment systems. ApplePay, the new chip technology in debit/credit cards, the ability to just tap my card against a reader, paypal, all those cool things that don't try to fundamentally change our monetary system are great! Innovation!

Going to a defaltionary system is a step back.

Don't buy the stupid YEN book. I'm reading that for fun and I've got a weird definition of fun.

http://www.amazon.ca/Lords-Finance-Bankers-Broke-World/dp/0143116800

Lords of Finance is a fantastic book! It won the damn Pulitzer! It does a good job of explaining the difficulties of our pre-bretton woods system. I highly advise you read that. It's also pretty entertaining. It completely destroyed any thought in my head about reverting back to the gold standard. Convinced me thoroughly that the gold standard would be a serious step backwards.

I think all people who want to change our monetary system should know about the history of it first.

u/1point618 · 2 pointsr/Buttcoin

> Really, your points are mostly about social structure.

My points are 100% about social structure. I tried my best not to make any conclusions about the technology itself. Technology and social structures are different things, and even when we use the same words to describe them (network, decentralized, etc), we're actually talking about different concepts.

> Bitcoin is not a "political movement".

Bitcoin may not be a political movement, but it does have a social movement and social structure surrounding it. That is what the article is about.

> It's a technological leap forward.

And this is where you go wrong. Technology doesn't do things on its own. Technology is only successful insomuch as people use it. If you analyze bitcoin the technology in a theoretical vacuum that does not ask "why do people use this, why do they want to, what does it help them do?", then you will not make accurate predictions about that technology and the ways in which it will be adopted.

This is one of the major mistakes bitcoin proponents make, thinking that bitcoin is some force that can sweep the world and leave people behind. It's not. A technology will not change the world without adoption.

My next article in this series is going to be about The Lever of Riches by Joel Mokyr (link). It's an economic history that asks "why do some cultures see more technological progress than others?", and in answering that question also answers "how do technologies change the world?". The answer is that invention (coming up with new technologies) is relatively easy, but innovation (having those technologies adopted to the point of changing human behavior) is hard. Innovation happens through making people want to use the tech.

u/MillenniumCondor · 3 pointsr/Buttcoin

I would just sell it and take the ~25% loss. You could do a lot worse. If you want a sound investment strategy, read the Bogleheads investment philosophy. They recommend dollar-cost-averaging your way into a diversified portfolio of low-cost, no-load index funds. You might also check out The Bogleheads' Guide to Investing. It is a great introduction to proper investing (not speculating, which is what crypto "investors" are actually engaged in). Your local public library probably has a copy. Even at $11/hr you can save for a comfortable retirement. If you can manage to save up $1000 in your savings account, you can buy an all-in one fund and simply put a fraction of your paycheck into it every month. It's hard to get rich quick, but easy to get rich slowly.

u/Hashmir · 2 pointsr/Buttcoin

>Whole business model of crypto is to FOMO people into buying high and selling low. There is literally nothing you can do to predict whether the price is going up or down. It is pure gambling. If you want to gamble, go to Vegas. Gambling there is regulated and you odds of winning are much better than in crypto wild west.

>The best way to deal with FOMO is to understand that you can have FOMO about anything. Does FOMO of winning a lottery keep you up at night? I think not.

Seconded. FOMO is the core of all cryptocurrency speculation (and bubbles generally), but it's not unique to it.

The good news is this means almost all of the advice for dealing with other kinds of FOMO—like seeing other people's "better" lives on social media—works just as well for crypto.

Consider these articles on dealing with FOMO, mentally replacing "Facebook" with "crypto charts", "social events" with "investment opportunities", and "exciting experiences" with "easy 10x gains":

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/stronger-the-broken-places/201501/10-ways-overcome-fear-missing-out

https://lifehacker.com/how-can-i-overcome-my-fear-of-missing-out-1148725866

For some more direct advice on defeating crypto FOMO, I highly recommend reading Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain ($5 on Kindle, link is the author's referral link, not mine).

A lot of it is basically about why the underlying economics is nonsense, which you've already figured out based on your post, but chapters 4 and 8 were what killed any remaining jealousy I had over the people who actually did buy Bitcoin ten years ago.

Basically, it made me realize two important things. First, many of those hypothetical gains aren't real. They're just numbers on a screen until you actually cash out. And cashing out is significantly harder than it seems. So when someone shows me a chart saying I could have turned a few hundred US Dollars into a pile of Bitcoin worth tens of thousands of USD Tethers, I know that their numbers aren't fully reflective of what I would actually be seeing in real-world cash gains right this moment.

Second, the ease and frequency of scams, hacks, user error, and general malfeasance means that the raw numbers don't reflect the actual risk. Let's say I had a bunch of Bitcoin in 2010. Well, I probably would have had in Mt. Gox, like most people who were doing anything other than sitting on a cold wallet. And then I would have lost them when Mt. Gox got hacked and shut down. Whee.

And if not Mt. Gox? Between 2010 and 2016, a third of all exchanges had been hacked and almost half had closed. Who cares that my original "investment" nominally goes up 10x if I lose 90% of it in the meantime?

I'm pretty smart, but I'm not psychic; I would be fooling myself to think I would have cleverly avoided all the bad options and only taken the precise actions that would have let me navigate the field of scammers and hackers and successfully cash out with my entire wallet intact over the span of eight years. So what am I actually "missing out" on?

u/cbct73 · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

Thanks, it was nice talking to you. I'll take a look at the book and article you mentioned.

As a counter point, for the credit theory of money, I highly recommend the book 'Money: The Unauthorized Biography' by Felix Martin.

Take care.

u/EdmundSchuster · 2 pointsr/Buttcoin

I think a good starting point would be this book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Property-Margaret-Davies/dp/1904385842

or this one:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0521130603

Without getting too philosophical - rights can be eternal and universal from a moral perspective, of course. But you need to invoke this concept exactly because the effective positive law (the one enforced by state institutions) sadly does not always follow the principles so expressed.

Elections in democracies broadly speaking give one vote to every person (more or less at least). Unless you build a fully Sybil-resistant blockchain system with one vote per person you can't replicate this. Also elections aren't "forks" - they _generally_ don't leave behind a "UK classic". This is important because - as we see in the BC universe all the time - it removes the uncertainty about the relative success of the two branches and guarantees (within reason) that all will be bound by the majority consensus. This is jut off the top of my mind so may very well be missing an important aspect!

u/romad20000 · 3 pointsr/Buttcoin

Tim swamson wrote a pretty fabulous book, and one of the chapters details this problem. If you havent read it you should. I would gladly pay 9.99 for it, but they are free on amazon, and its certainly better then the "traded bitcoins for a month made money, buy muh book" shit, although at times its a little too technical.

Edit: here it is http://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-Money-like-Informational-Commodity-Bitcoin-ebook/dp/B00MEAO7XK/ref=la_B00BYONZTE_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408408559&sr=1-1

u/banished98ti · 2 pointsr/Buttcoin

Its not my theory. Its how the financial system works.

So are you now suggesting that the private commercial banking system finances the US government with dollars? So the US government is completely reliant on banks like JP Morgan? LOL! Your logic may have applied 100 years+ ago. Unfortunately most economic textbooks still think we are on a fixed-rate exchange system.

Modern economics since Adam Smith came about during a time when the monetary system was on a gold standard. This means 90-95% of economic monetary pseudo-theory simply does not apply to our monetary system.

Economic textbooks treat the dollar as if it were a scarce commodity ie continuation of gold. This is why you can't understand what I am saying.

The government issues bonds primarily as a result of what went on during the previous 200years+. As I said a relic of the gold standard. A government bond is merely a savings account, its dollars with a term and a coupon. They decide the terms. Its basically a 'risk free asset'. The government never has to issue bonds to finance itself in a fiat-credit system. It can instruct its central bank to Credit accounts for purchases of good/services that it needs to function. As long as someone is willing to accept dollars for something, the government can pay.

The government is the largest buyer of goods/services in the economy.

Government bonds simply remove dollars created by previous deficits out of the system and replace them with dollars + coupon.

There is no such thing as a 'money supply' in our monetary system. Just entries of debts/credits on accounting ledgers. The value of the credit depends on the borrowers ability to repay the debt. ie. labor producing a good/service to satisfy the debt. Labor power backs money in our system.

The banks do not create money because when they issue loans there is a corresponding liability also created. This is different with the government.

When the government deficit spends it creates new dollars that enter the economy the same way when the private sector 'deficit spends' ie borrows money. Its the same thing, the difference is the government never has to repay back its own debt(vertical money) while the private sector has to repay debts(horizontal money).

This is the crucial difference. When the private sector deficit spends ie takes on huge loans, there is almost always a crisis around the corner because the value of the loans exceeds repayment ability primarily due to the 'magic of compound interest'. When the government deficit spends its own currency to make investments it can never be unable to repay the debt.

Here start reading:

https://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Innocent-Frauds-Economic-Policy/dp/0692009590

u/AVBforPrez · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

In all seriousness, as I've posted a few times, Bitcoin enthusiasts largely fit a profile outlined in one of the best books outlining mass movements.

http://www.amazon.com/The-True-Believer-Movements-Perennial/dp/0060505915/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1411180962&sr=8-1&keywords=the+true+believer

It should be mandatory reading in high schools imho, the US would be a better place.

u/normal_rc · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

I'm not upset about it, but USA certainly does tolerate National Socialist videos, since they're protected by the 1st amendment.

You can even buy National Socialist books like "Mein Kampf" on Amazon.com

https://www.amazon.com/Mein-Kampf/dp/0395925037

u/ashmoran · 13 pointsr/Buttcoin

/u/nickjohnson has it summed up in this comment:

> Does NOBODY write unit tests?

A unit test is not a complicated thing. It takes one small, self-contained piece of code, sets up some situational context, runs the code with parameters set to interesting values, and then checks that certain conditions are met. (Conditions include things like: the correct result is returned, certain messages are sent, certain messages are not sent, the result is returned in less than X seconds, or whatever.)

It is important to note that while unit tests are not complicated, this does not mean they are not difficult to write. It is somewhere between art and science to write good unit tests, but it is possible. There is something like 20 years of work in this field, especially since the (capital A) Agile movement started. There are whole books on the subject, such as Kent Beck's effortlessly enlightening Test Driven Development: By Example.

Unfortunately, the number of programmers is growing so fast, that new programmers are joining the field faster than they can encounter experienced programmers, and so they are relearning lessons that were first learnt when they were still young, or even before they were born.

This problem didn't used to matter so much, but the situation has changed. Now that people know how to create money with code, code quality is not just a matter of late-night bug-fixing to get a small app released on time, it could potentially make or lose the entire net worth of a person, or even millions of people.

This is exactly the reason I've never bought a single ETH token. When I saw Etheruem, I said exactly this: "It seems to combine the properties of Bitcoin and OpenTransactions in the riskiest possible way". Some time later, The DAO showed the potential downside of that risk.

This kind of problem will not be fixed by developers learning how to write unit tests, it needs a bigger picture than that. But we will be able to put a lot of the world's wealth to much better use, if the developers of cryptocurrencies are able to find and reuse the learnings of software developers in other fields. And as Nick suggested, writing unit tests would be a good start.

u/apMinus · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

Same guy re: Purse.IO providing easy credit card fraud:

>I doubt that it's a huge problem for them but if credit card fraud is a serious problem then the solution is for Amazon to stop accepting credit cards and accept BCH directly. The fact that they haven't done this yet is a sign that they are willing to bear the losses from credit card fraud. That's their own choice and not something I need to concern myself with.

...

So anyway. The part that OP bought looks pretty freakin cool at least. Might actually buy that, haha.

u/SnapshillBot · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

Bitcoin does not give a fuck about gender or intellectually stunted garbage like social justice.

Snapshots:

  1. This Post - archive.org, [megalodon.jp*](http://megalodon.jp/pc/get_simple/decide?url=https://www.amazon.com/dp/B073NF2Z9G/ "could not auto-archive; click to resubmit it!"), archive.is

    ^(I am a bot.) ^([Info](/r/SnapshillBot) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=\/r\/SnapshillBot))
u/kingrobotiv · 0 pointsr/Buttcoin

That would make an interesting story. A friend of mine gave me Armed America a while back and its oddly fascinating.

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

It seems like his credentials that make him "the world's foremost IT security expert" is several very odd conference papers that you can find here:

https://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/business/scm/staff/profiles/associate-head-of-school/tanveer-zia#Publications

If you do a ctrl+f for "wright", pretty odd that it's this hard to find these papers. [Also if you look at his very popular book] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Regulatory-Standards-Compliance-Handbook/dp/1597492663) (a book rife with plagiarism) the reviews talk about how poor the grammar is, didn't Satoshi always have particularly good grammar?

u/zom-ponks · 11 pointsr/Buttcoin

I know I'm overshilling this, but our own /u/dgerard has written a book on this which I think should be a "beginners guide".

I've been here long enough to get the insider baseball, but I still got a load of mileage of it, so try it.

Feel free to ask any questions though, there's a lot to unpack for all of us.

u/dgerard · 1 pointr/Buttcoin

He used to be quite the fan, still follows the space. He wrote a survey of the area in 2014 trying to work out if there was anything to this stuff (which I have on my tablet and haven't read yet). I follow and recommend his twitter.

u/_per_aspera_ad_astra · 3 pointsr/Buttcoin

Attack of the 50 foot blockchain by our own u/dgerard

You can find the paperback for sale here.

His blog can be found here.

David—anything you’d like to add so people can find your content?

u/DesolateShrubbery · 5 pointsr/Buttcoin

Excuse me, you haven't read the guide on how to write Buttcoin Cash (BCH, 💩).

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6r40ex/interesting_observation_all_trolls_maximalists/dl2ezru/

See this example on how to write Buttcoin Cash (BCH, 💩): https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6r40ex/interesting_observation_all_trolls_maximalists/dl2f59z/

The correct way to refer to Buttcoin Cash (BCH, 💩) is Buttcoin Cash (BCH, 💩). Do not confuse Buttcoin Cash (BCH, 💩) with those other butts with a lowercase 'b'.

u/msft_baller · 8 pointsr/Buttcoin

Someone just needs to adapt /u/dgerard's book in to a documentary.

u/floatboth · 5 pointsr/Buttcoin

Not sure about doors but it can penetrate butts