Best products from r/btc

We found 44 comments on r/btc discussing the most recommended products. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 230 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

Top comments mentioning products on r/btc:

u/AnoniMiner · 0 pointsr/btc

>Stock market

OK, ~80% of your reply is on the stock market, and it's one claim more broken than the next. This is serious bullshit... No, I don't day trade. I work in finance, and see things from the inside. And your understanding of the stock market is so poor, it's no better than what a journalist might say. It's hard to accept, and you won't accept my word for it, I'm sure, yet it's true. "Pick good stocks", "real investors", "stocks immune from inflation", "re-invest profits", ... this is all empty talk of someone who has an amateurish understanding at best.

>Thus the market cap of a real company is how much the investors estimate that the company's assets (including those cash reserves) and future profits are worth. That is why Apple's shares keep increasing in value.

Sure, and the flood of money provided by QE has got nothing to do with it. Lol


>Stock investing, if anything, is the opposite: the older generation invests, and the new generation reaps the profits.

Right because it's the older generation that "needs to build a retirement pot", who contributes to their 401k every month, and the younger generation that draws annuities every month to spend as they please. LOLOLOLOLOL Please keep entertaining me.


>Smart investors (real investors) buy stocks for their dividends (or equivalent, like company expansion or stock buybacks from the company).

LOL So naive it's not even funny. But sure, keep believing that.

Once again, read "Where are the customers' yachts?". Written in the 1920s, still just as valid. It's actually a classic in investments.

https://www.amazon.com/Where-Are-Customers-Yachts-Street/dp/0471770892/


>Only fools and criminals invest in currencies

I'd gladly be a criminal fool like George Soros or others who made a killing from trading FX.

You also show very little understanding of fiat currency, which, with no exception, over time has gone to zero. The best we, as humanity, have been able to do with fiat is the GBP. Over ~300 years it is nothing but a shadow of what it was at first. (Hint: 1 pound stirling was... the equivalent of 1 pound of stirling silver. I'll let you calculate the inflation.)


I'm not gonna discuss the stock market with you any more, much like you wouldn't discuss CS with a philosopher getting all their information from popular books on CS.

 


 

>Funny thing for a bitcoin supporter to say ;-)

Ad Hominem. Lack of real arguments?

>Thus the fact that the toy LN that is out there (whose users are all there to shill BTC or help the LN devs) has processed thousands of transactions is no evidence at all that it can achieve that goal.

It also doesn't mean that it cannot. In 1990 the internet could not stream 4K. Not only that, it was damn hard for anyone to imagine that one day we could. Then MP3/MPEG and other compression algos came. People are building, you are talking. People are doing real CS research, absolutely needed to make it viable, you are talking.


>> Cost of fiat infrastructure

>And what does that have to do with investing?


You mentioned the daily $6m that miners make, and I replied with the correct analogy. It's the cost of securing the network. Or better, the current revenue for securing the network.


>But any crypto could do that too, without the LN: just have generous miners that accept 0-fee transactions.


Really? Did you really just say 0-fee could achieve the same? Honestly, I will start doubting your CS credentials if you keep it like that. How about a FREE DDoS attack that brings the entire network down if that was the case? Send 100m txs of 1sat each to myself, for free, and flood the network? And write a script that will repeat the same thing after they get confirmed?

>It is "create a functional payment system that millions of people will want to use instead of PayPal and the like, and instead of on-chain cryptocurrency."

You lack basic economics understanding. People will use it IF it is more convenient. Bitcoin offers something PayPal doesn't, censorship resistance. This doesn't come for free, it has a cost. Those who find that valuable will use it, others won't. Market competition. And it's also not instead of on-chain. God, how difficult is it to understand that they will complement each other? If absolute security is paramount, you'll do on-chain and pay the fee. This will likely be for large sums of money. For your coffee? Who freaking cares. You'll use the LN. Credit cards for coffee, you say? Sure, once could build CCs on top of bitcoin, too. But perhaps more importantly, the LN offers use cases previously not possible, like streaming money (stream content for money). Or true micro payments - $10c for reading an article, for instance. Or how about forgetting about the local currency when you travel?

All of these are absolutely legitimate cases for a "digital global currency". This is driven by market forces, nothing else. People who need it will use it, others won't. But if you can't, or refuse to see it, that's hardly anything that anyone can do.


u/Adrian-X · 3 pointsr/btc

Some feedback about tipping paper wallets.

Value is in the eye of the beholder, the reverie of the tip need to value it to keep it. one way to ascertain if the tip will be valued is:

> U: Can I pay with BCH?

> S: No I wish.

> U: Do you have a Bitcoin Cash Wallet?

> S: No.

> U: what you you think about Bitcoin? I can give you an extra tip in BCH?

> S: I'd love to get some but its too complicated.

this conversation can go 100 different ways.

If they don't think it has value ask them if they have herd about it, and if you gave them some now, would they hold onto it and see if it increase in value.

I always ask if I can pay first, if there is interest I ascertain the level of understanding and enthusiasm and offer them an additional tip in BCH. (If I don't think it will be valued I don't give an extra BCH tip) when I do tip I give a double tip to create a positive experiences and tell them to save the BCH tip.

___

Now to get someone to hold onto the wallet it must look valuable, shitty paper wallets get thrown out with the postal fliers. paper wallets with hologram tamper proof stickers seem more valuable and important. I think they make a difference. I've just recently designed a paper wallet that folds and is sealed with a wax seal someone should seal these kits onopenbazaar with a custom stamp.

In my experiences to propagate BCH the paper wallet should be a work of art. solving the technical issue is probably the biggest task, but making it valued by the recipient is the most important.

u/menkaur · 2 pointsr/btc

I am saying that bitcoin is a very successful system, and that it's working according to some rules. Now, everybody who bought bitcoin so far, bought it accepting those rules. What you are saying is that the majority should have the right to impose rule changes on everybody else. Changes SHOULD be difficult. If you want to try something new and exciting, there are a lot of altcoins, and you can easily find something that better fits your needs.


The rule changes you have in mind are beneficial. However, the easier it is to make beneficial changes, the easier it is to introduce malicious changes by special interests. Low consensus points set bad precedents. Someone offline some time ago decided that full consensus is too difficult so let's make it representative democracy, and 50% should be enough so as many awesome ideas as possible get implemented. If you're into bitcoin, chances are that you're using it because you don't like the end result of that process.

Almost nobody NOW believes into removing the 21m cap. But than, 1) I do recommend you read book by Murray Rothbard about how they abolished the gold standard. It makes a fascinating read https://www.amazon.com/History-Money-Banking-United-States/dp/0945466331/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1482860462&sr=8-1&keywords=history+of+money+in+the+united+states . 2) People who believe that the money must be blessed by a central bank and a government haven’t joined us yet. In the future that is going to change

u/Capt_Roger_Murdock · 5 pointsr/btc

>Furthermore, money that is used for its exchange value is better when it is inflationary, as it keeps the economy hotter and prevents deflationary spirals like what we saw during the Great Depression.

The idea that you need some price inflation to “encourage spending” and “stimulate the economy” is the propaganda being put out by the parasitic class that’s perpetuating and profiting from this MASSIVE scam. The truth is that you don't need to “encourage” people to spend money. Spending money is all that it's ultimately good for. So it's always a question of how you choose to allocate that spending across time, how much to spend today vs. tomorrow vs. next year, etc. Also consider that when you save money, you are in effect making an investment in the overall economy. Money isn't wealth. Instead, it allows you to make a claim on scarce, real resources. Money is an accounting system for facilitating the exchange of those resources by serving as a credible record of value given but not yet received. When you "just sit on money," the resources that you could have claimed immediately will instead remain available to be used by others -- whether for immediate consumption or investment. You have in effect loaned those real resources to the rest of society. So if we had a system with a fixed money supply, it makes sense to me that the purchasing power of that money should increase over time as the economy grows. In that scenario, the rate of price deflation is essentially the market-determined "interest rate" on a very low-risk loan that can be recalled at any time (by spending the money).

Or think about it from the opposite angle -- why an inflationary money supply doesn't make sense. Again, money is supposed to represent a credible signal of value given but not yet received. If there's an entity that can simply print new money into existence at essentially zero cost, the message carried by that new money is going to be a false one. I’m sure you can intuitively grasp how an ordinary counterfeiter is in effect stealing from others when he prints up phony hundred-dollar bills in his basement. Well the same is true of the more sophisticated counterfeiters in fancy suits who call their counterfeiting things like “open-market operations” and “quantitative easing.”

Recommended reading: Paper Money Collapse: The Folly of Elastic Money

u/crypto__jesus · 2 pointsr/btc

I would always recommend a hardware wallet. Second best option is a paper wallet done properly if only storing offline. The next best option is using an iOS BTC wallet like CoPay or Bitcoin.com wallet. I personally wouldn't recommend keeping any money on an Android wallet app unless it's on a Pixel. Reason being, there are vulnerabilities announced all the time on iOS and Android. Apple is able to push those patches out the next day or same week usually. Android phone manufacturers take about 1-3 months to push updates sometimes. Since Pixel hardware and software is made by Google, they push updates out just as fast as Apple does.

I personally use a Ledger Nano S and Love it. I keep in on a keychain with this little Micro USB keychain dongle: https://www.amazon.com/Keychain-Charging-Android-Tablets-Devices/dp/B01HTJTMH6/ref=sr_1_5?s=wireless&ie=UTF8&qid=1511297076&sr=1-5&keywords=micro+usb+keychain

I also keep the Bitcoin.com wallet on my phone so I can send and receive (mostly receive) small payments. A lot of people where I live use BCH and Ethereum to buy stuff on craigslist. So it works perfectly.


$80-$100 for a ledger Nano S is totally worth the money to me. Gives me peace of mind that my funds are safe offline. I wouldn't trust any wallet kept on my computer. Computers have so many attack vectors.

u/rdar1999 · 4 pointsr/btc

As she said, the potential to do harm and to do good is huge. This is in all dimensions.

The good side is to make the world even more connected for mutual enrichment. Our species's great leap was the ability to cooperate with large amounts of unknown people, this means trade with them (see https://www.amazon.com/Sapiens-Humankind-Yuval-Noah-Harari/dp/0062316095).

We want to interact with other groups because we want to trade with them. To do this, we need communication, which is flexible but also standardized: languages. Trade is the biggest drive to language, the same way trade is the biggest drive to money (and only from this we derive the concept of store of value BTW).

All of this makes me pretty confident that we need bitcoin (cash), it is the natural step forward. We can only cooperate in higher degree if we can eschew the trust element, that's why national issued "cryptocurrencies" are an uninformed move to keep the obsolete alive, it won't work, I'm 100% confident of that.

The "evil" part of it is the perception that if I control communication, I control the economy. If I control money, I control trade, I control cooperation, I control an important part of communication.

Hence the tension.

ps: that's why I always agreed with Ver on how stupid core's concept of "bitcoin as reserve of value" really is, it is fundamentally flawed.

ps2: Teal Swan, whoa, what an alluring human being :D

u/unstoppable-cash · 2 pointsr/btc

There are some notable/deserving winners of the Nobel Prize, like Richard Feynman (shared Physics Nobel award in 1965).

Feynman was brilliant in many ways! He was also a great practical joker.

His book, Surely Your Joking, Mr. Feynman: Adventures of a Curious Character is worth a read!

Feynman had a varied career from working on the Manhattan Project during WW2 to determining the cause of the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster (1986)

u/ashmoran · 5 pointsr/btc

The advantages of learning about economics go way beyond understanding Bitcoin.

Economics (in the school started by Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, etc), is the study of how people act in order to achieve happiness. It asks: given people have certain goals (but without making any judgements on what those are), and limited time and resources to achieve them, how should they act to maximise their satisfaction? Even a man alone on a desert island is acting economically: should he spend another hour making shelter, another hour catching fish, or another hour relaxing in the sun? The economics of trade is built on top of this. Will one person with too much fish, and another with too much wood, discover they're both happier after trading than they were before, even though the total amount of wood and fish in existence has not changed? Indeed, the most important work on economics by Mises is called simply Human Action.

A few years ago I came across a book (Economics in One Lesson) which began with the following foreword:

>I strongly recommend that every American acquire some basic knowledge of economics, monetary policy and the intersection of politics with the economy. No formal classroom is required; a desire to read and learn will suffice. There are countless important books to consider, but the following are an excellent starting point: The Law by Frédéric Bastiat; Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt, What Has Government Done to Our Money? by Murray Rothbard; The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek, and Economics for Real People by Gene Callahan.
>If you simply read and comprehend these relatively short texts, you will know far more than most educated people about economics and government. … If you care about the future of this country, arm yourself with knowledge and fight back against economic ignorance.

I did exactly this and read them one by one. I summed up my findings in this blog post. I've found the books in the list above enough to defend against the biggest and most common fallacies you see in the news. I highly recommend reading at least one, if not all of them, and Economics in One Lesson is the one I recommend most.

u/tl121 · 9 pointsr/btc

There is an assumption beneath all of this math. And that is that there are no short cuts (or at least no significant short cuts) to working SHA256 backwards. Over the years there have been many cryptographic algorithms that appeared to require a certain amount of brute force to break, but shortcuts were found that "broke" these algorithms.

So basically, if you use these algorithms you are trusting the people who claim to have evaluated them when they say they couldn't find any shortcuts. You are trusting them to be honest and you are trusting them to be competent. And they could even be both and someone cleverer or luckier might come up with a new way of recasting the problem that makes it easy.

I'm not saying that I know how to do this, or that I know anyone who does. However, I have met a number of people who have known of shortcuts to break many encryption algorithms. Most of these people worked or had worked for NSA. And before that there are famous people before my time who broke "secure" crypto. The most famous example of this is Alan Turing and the people who worked with him at Hut 6 who broke the German enigma cypher system during WWII through a combination of mathematics and special purpose hardware.

The imitation game

The Hut Six story

u/SirEDCaLot · 6 pointsr/btc

Makes sense.

Blocks continue to increase in size- True, but at the same time, hard drive space and bandwidth is getting cheaper. Right now we're at 100GB or so worth of blockchain data. I can buy a 4TB drive on Amazon for $100.
That said, obviously the blockchain size growth can't increase faster than storage availability without causing some centralization. But we are nowhere there yet, and I don't think that's a valid reason to avoid a 2MB upgrade today.

Thoughts on that?

As for contentious forks, keep in mind BCH (an intentional fork to make a different currency) is different than 2X / Unlimited / Classic / XT (controversial attempts to change Bitcoin itself). This is an important difference. Right now the main issue of contention is the 2X hard fork- SegWit2x was an industry agreement to do a one time hard fork to 2MB and also activate SegWit. Now that SW activated there are those who say the 2X part should be abandoned.
However I'd point out that the 2X part carries strong support from miners and most Bitcoin companies. The only ones who really make it controversial are the Core developers, who are against it. If Core was in favor, just about any observer would agree that there is full consensus. However Core has made no plans or explanation for how or when a block size increase will be done (even though it's obvious one will be needed eventually, even with SegWit).

Thoughts on that?

As for BCH, I don't see it harming Bitcoin. Everyone seems to understand that BCH and BTC are now different, and obviously a lot of people like BCH as evidenced by its strong price support.

u/Kain_niaK · 6 pointsr/btc

He does not. He copy pastes them together and it's something he has been doing like that from before Bitcoin. Look at this article about one the books he wrote (before Bitcoin) and also read the reviews on his book.

The book was called "The IT Regulatory and Standards Compliance Handbook"

Here is a quote from one of the reviews.

>I really had hopes for this one.... Very disappointed. First of all, the material is basically a mix of tools one can use (which is helpful) and overarching organizational rhetoric that is as misplaced as it is nonsensical. Secondly, the editing is SO BAD that it makes it impossible to read more than a paragraph. An example: "Permisions be inconsistently applied when the permissions are retained in moving a file is moved to a new directory[sic]" page 400. Absolutley save your money.

Does this sound familiar? That quote is from 2011, 3 years before he came to the Bitcoin scene.

another quote

>I purchased this book hoping, and judging by the title and page count, that it would be helpful in updating our IS department's policies and procedures. I wanted a reference that would help us include the relevant parts of SOX, HIPPA, PCI, COBIT, and the rest of the alphabet soup of regulations and standards into our processes.

>Unfortunately, this book is more a guide for beginner IT auditors. It took about 10 minutes for me to realize this, so the fault is mine for not examining the TOC and sample pages more thoroughly before I purchased it. I decided to gleam what I could from it, then pass it on to our Internal Audit department.

>As I read the chapters that seemed germane to my project, it became clear that the book was not very well written or edited. I am not a grammar snob; the writing is disjointed, and the grammatical and typographical errors are so frequent they are distracting. I do not recommend this book for beginner auditors because there are better publications available (see the ISACA bookstore online).

This is because CSW copy pastes his books together. No wonder he can write a paper a day unless his control or v or c button broke again.


There is even a review by Dale Liu on that amazon page, which is one of the guys that worked on that book ..... lol


This Dale Liu guy has worked on other books as well. Here is one such book.

Let's look at a review of this book that Dale Liu worked on:

>I'm not the type to go out of my way to give negative feedback, but I seriously need to warn you CCNA canditates about this book. Don't buy it, you're better off spending that 59.95 on different study guide. There are TONS of errors in this book. I'm not at all exaggerating, there are mistakes on just about every page - it's ridiculous! I've contatcted Syngress in an attempt to get my money back but haven't gotten a reply as of this writing.
I've read through numerous IT manuals and study guides in the last 9 years and never have I seen such slipshod material. It doesn't even look like anything was proof read for spelling or grammatical errors. I put my time in with this book too, so I'm not just basing this on a single page or chapter; I can honestly say that, having read through just over half of the book, I have probably seen at least 50 problems ranging from simple things like two identical paragraphs in a row (not a big deal) to staight up WRONG information such as this sentence on Page 182: "Similar to its predecessor IGRP, EIGRP has a maximum hop count of 224 and a default maximum hop count of 100.". According to Cisco, IGRP has a max hop count of 255. The second part my be correct, I don't know because the section on IGRP doesn't mention anything about its default max hop count. With these kinds of inconsistencies, I'm reluctant to commit any of this information to memory, which is the exact reason why we buy study guides, right?
If Syngress makes things right, either by refund or a completely revised second edition, I will re-post with better things to say. If not, I'll move on and never buy their stuff again."

This book was written by Dale Liu and a guy named Jesse Varsalone. There is a video of Jesse Varsalone where he basically starts with naming all his credentials and how much he knows. Sounds familiar? Anybody seeing a little pattern here of a network of scammers and people that copy paste books together?

The same Jesse Varsalone is credited in this book. Written by Dave Kleiman, Craig Wright, Jesse "James" Varsalone, Timothy.

Coincidence? I think not.


However CSW does provide a very nice test for the community. Users that tell you they are reading his work are

  • either lying (they might be shills)

  • show they don't understand Bitcoin on a rational level, only an emotional one

  • are so much smarter than CSW that they start over analyzing his stuff and come to the conclusion that he must be more brilliant than anybody can comprehend, maybe he means this ... or maybe: oh wait now this is a profound thought what if .... which is like an amplified DDOS attack. You say some vague stuff and some brilliant persons starts filling it in with their thoughts, which then attracts other people. This is I think what happened to Ryan X Charles and possibly Gavin.

    and one more thing, do you see this pic? This is how CSW wanted to look like when he was copy pasting IT books. This is how he wants to look when he is copy pasting papers on Bitcoin together.

    Brilliant actor and conman, one of the best the world has ever seen. I have seen him fool a bunch of teenagers in believing that it was him who thought birds how to fly. That's how good he is.

u/Mario_Speedvvagon · 2 pointsr/btc

Since you're a newbie, you really should first start by getting caught up on Bitcoin's history. I suggest reading materials and interviews that occurred before 2015. Andreas Antonopoulos may be a bit of a Core shill now, but all his talks before 2015 were really great and inspiring. Then there's this book that was first published in 2015 and does a great job recanting the history and foundation of Bitcoin's beginnings up to 2015.

If you wonder what direction Bitcoin should be going, why not read what Satoshi Nakamoto himself had to say? All of Satoshi's public thoughts are published on http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/

edit: forgot to mention James D'angelo's blackboard series https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bhe61JaNFLU&list=PLzctEq7iZD-7-DgJM604zsndMapn9ff6q&index=6

u/don2468 · 1 pointr/btc

>> if LN or any second layer solution is the preferred scaling method it would take ~8 years for 1Billion users to open just one LN channel, no other commerce happening on chain just opening LN channels
>
>
> In order to make it a fair apples-to-apples comparison, please think about what will happen if these 1Billion users decide to buy their morning coffee using BCH on the same day?
>
>
> I'll tell you. Only these coffee purchases alone will instantly create at least a 220GB backlog in the BCH mempool. Which will take around 48 days (!) to clear with full 32MB blocks. Of course assuming that no other commerce is happening on chain.



  • If BTC can only scale on second layers ---> custodial solutions, see - Why is BTC Hard Money and all forks are Shitcoins BTC White Paper 2.0


    Now what most Core maximalists fail to grasp: I and many others are not against 2nd layers see - the need for 2nd layers Emin Gün Sirer - Scaling Bitcoin x100000: The Next Few Orders of Magnitude we favour letting the system (blocksize) grow as it had been up to 2016 & see where it can get us


    the fundamental difference


  • BTC: 1 Billion entities to be soverign over their own money on 1MB BTC it would take about 8 years for each to get 1 channel open which is clearly unrealistic and so leads to custodial solutions - Hal Finney Bitcoin Backed Banks.


  • BCH: Now with only 50MB blocks those same Billion people could put their discretionary spends into a 2nd layer solution once a Month (your math) and perform as many tx's as they like during that month, while still being soverign over their own money.


    Though we are actully aiming for 1GB blocks, see - jtoomim: My performance target with Blocktorrent is to be able to propagate a 1 GB block in about 5-10 seconds to all nodes in the network that have 100 Mbps connectivity and quad core CPUs. bringing channel opening for 1 Billion people to every other day plus 25% left over for all other "Big Commerce" (your $200 Million transfers.)


    The BTC future clearly is a custodial one for most people. BCH - jurys still out, I am not even against custodial solutions, I assume a hard money standard would still be a better system than what we currently have.


    I personally am not 100% convinced either way, Unforkable Ultrahard Money (BTC) or a money that can at this early stage still incorporate the best ideas of the space CTOR etc. eventually forking less and less until it too is unforkable. The latter being the better long term option imo, is the BTC protocol currently optimal? I am hedged either way are you?
u/467fb7c8e76cb885c289 · 2 pointsr/btc

> Never read it, will google them after this reply.

It's so fucking cool it's unreal. Not up to date with recent developments but wanna check it out again properly soon.

>Mendelson can be useful but, heck, you need some strong background. There's a lot of books mistitled as "introductions", mendelson is one of them.

That'd explain why it was so dense lol - I dived from no mathematical logic (apart from like basic predicate calculus) and using first order symbols sparingly.

>There's actually no perfect book to serve as introduction to mathematical logic, but I highly recommendthat you check out https://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Logic-Oxford-Texts/dp/0199215626
>
>Also get this little fella here: https://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Logic-Dover-Books-Mathematics/dp/0486264041 for a nice, short survey.

Thanks :D I'll check it out. Given your breadth of knowledge on it I imagine your background is pure mathematics?

u/MemoryDealers · 3 pointsr/btc

Thanks for keeping an open mind. I’m one of the main characters in these best selling books #1, 2 and they do a great job covering my involvement. If you read either one, you will never questions my dedication to the space again.

u/bitusher · 1 pointr/btc

What you are asking for is a complete lecture on how bitcoin works essentially . This is a good place to start-

https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#block-versions

or this

https://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Bitcoin-Unlocking-Digital-Cryptocurrencies/dp/1449374042

segwit details are found here -
https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_wallet_dev/

>I assume you need the reverted tx to be byte for byte the same as the old SegWit tx in order for the Signature to be valid,

The signatures can all be recreated and made valid with them selves in the new history and don't need to match the old history that just so happens to have the "same txs." with the properties that "matter" like tx amount , ect...

u/deadalnix · 4 pointsr/btc

I don't think it is bullshit. This is the value of BTC as money, and money only. Bitcoin is also a store of value, a speculative asset, an edge against mainstream assets, etc...

The amount exchanged on exchange do not really matter as they are off chain and very high velocity, so don't contribute to the value of the asset as money.

Even if I assume your $200M is right, then the points still stands, most of BTC's value do not come from it's monetary use.

EDIT: Getting downvoted for reminding basic economics, bravo bravo ! You guys should spend less time on reddit and start reading this: https://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understand/dp/0517548232

u/[deleted] · 3 pointsr/btc

Welcome brother! Honestly, the only way is to start reading, reading, reading. I always recommend Mastering Bitcoin. Good luck and keep learning, I know its hard, but worth it.

u/SwedishSalsa · 2 pointsr/btc

The reason you don't see much debunking is because those who really understand economics (Austrian economics that is) are busy accumulating Bitcoin.
If you want to read up on it there's nice chapter on inflation in this book: Economics in one lesson - Henry Hazlitt

https://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understand/dp/0517548232/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1504879697&sr=8-1&keywords=hazlitt+economics+in+one+lesson

It's an easy to read book I recommend everyone.

u/scotty321 · 3 pointsr/btc

Happy New Year to everyone at r/btc! May we finally slay the Creature from Blockstream Island in 2016! :)

u/intertron · 22 pointsr/btc

If you haven't ever read Satoshi's writing I highly recommend it.

https://www.amazon.com/Book-Satoshi-Collected-Writings-Nakamoto/dp/0996061312

That is the one I had. It is great.

u/wisequote · 2 pointsr/btc

Please check the logical ordering of emails/threads as presented in this book, it might inspire you:

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/0996061312/ref=pe_2480960_170170910

u/tokyosilver · 5 pointsr/btc

I helped him a bit when he first came to Tokyo back in early 2014. He started working on "Digital Gold" back then. I really liked the book. Now is the time for him to work on his new book! https://www.amazon.co.jp/Digital-Gold-Bitcoin-Millionaires-Reinvent/dp/006236250X

u/Klutzkerfuffle · 6 pointsr/btc

You need to study Austrian Economics.

I recommend this book if you really want to understand what is going on.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1119473861/ref=cm_cr_arp_mb_bdcrb_top?ie=UTF8

u/wildsatchmo · 2 pointsr/btc

Thanks!! There is a chapter called 'On Bitcoin Mining as a Waste of Resources' in The Book of Satoshi which is a collection of his public writings. I've added timestamps to the original post but it doesn't give the urls :)

u/th1nkpatriot · 3 pointsr/btc

Just like HSBC. That's how these banks roll. Hypocrisy to the Nth degree.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-07-02/hsbc-judge-approves-1-9b-drug-money-laundering-accord

Anybody that knows anything about how the current monetary system was put into place knows it's the de facto standard of fraud.

The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve

https://www.amazon.com/dp/091298645X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_E.PdAb0FX3GJ2

The bankers just don't like what's happening and Jamie and Co. are realizing that they will become, in this analogy, the Blockbuster of banks to cryptocurrencies' Netflix.

u/pecuniology · 3 pointsr/btc

>"[Russian Central Bank Governor, Elvira Nabiullina's] gold buying makes me think she has read Saifedean Ammous’s The Bitcoin Standard: The Decentralized Alternative to Central Banking.  Don’t let the title fool you. This book is not the cover-to-cover crypto cheerleading/gold bashing other authors attempt to jam down our throats.  Dr. Ammous Is actually a Professor of Economics, and none other than “Black Swan” author Nassim Taleb wrote the introduction."

u/video_descriptionbot · 1 pointr/btc
SECTION | CONTENT
--|:--
Title | Bitcoin Q&A: Bitmain and the ASICBoost allegations
Description | ASICBoost and the allegations against Bitmain. What implications will this have on breaking the impasse between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Unlimited. I don't know if the allegations on covert mining are true, but we do know that there is an energy consumption advantage and Bitmain owns the patent for these chips. They claim they've only used them on the testnet but not the mainnet, 'for the good of the network.' However, if they didn't use it and won't use it, then they shouldn't mind if we disable it in a counter-optimisation. Covert ASICBoost threatens to derail protocol development. It's not a free market if this invention is patented under the threat of state force. The source of the drama for many actors in this scaling debate is about bruised egos, not scientifically supported arguments on the technology. This talk took place at the Silicon Valley Bitcoin meetup on April 11th 2017 at the Plug and Play Tech Center (@PlugandPlayTC) in Sunnyvale, California: https://www.meetup.com/Silicon-Valley-Bitcoin-Users/events/233760417/ RELATED: Can patent law slow down Bitcoin? - https://youtu.be/aGQKc-dQNC4 Proprietary editable blockchains & patent trolls - https://youtu.be/Pryy7n1a7UQ Am I in favour of activating SegWit? - https://youtu.be/9EEluhC9SxE Governance trade-offs in decentralised systems - https://youtu.be/dtwaW79Fj7c What is the biggest threat to Bitcoin? - https://youtu.be/1-XUbH1F0Os Could a state-sponsored 51% attack work? - https://youtu.be/KUd8ZGgm6Qo Andreas M. Antonopoulos is a technologist and serial entrepreneur who has become one of the most well-known and well-respected figures in bitcoin. Follow on Twitter: @aantonop https://twitter.com/aantonop Website: https://antonopoulos.com/ He is the author of two books: “Mastering Bitcoin,” published by O’Reilly Media and considered the best technical guide to bitcoin; “The Internet of Money,” a book about why bitcoin matters. THE INTERNET OF MONEY, v1: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Internet-Money-collection-Andreas-Antonopoulos/dp/1537000454/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8 MASTERING BITCOIN: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mastering-Bitcoin-Unlocking-Digital-Cryptocurrencies/dp/1449374042 Subscribe to the channel to learn more about Bitcoin & open blockchains! Music: "Unbounded" by Orfan (https://www.facebook.com/Orfan/) Outro Graphics: Phneep (http://www.phneep.com/) Outro Art: Rock Barcellos (http://www.rockincomics.com.br/)
Length | 0:08:15






****

^(I am a bot, this is an auto-generated reply | )^Info ^| ^Feedback ^| ^(Reply STOP to opt out permanently)