@SteveSimple Could you extend this to lightning? Could a lightning node estimate the price of Bitcoin by tracking the transaction amount that it routes?
@udiWertheimer@dylanleclair The coins without a supply cap, fiat included, will only appear cheaper to transact than Bitcoin. In the long run, these coins will lose value as their supply approaches infinity via a proof-of-work or debt-based issuance.
@SpencerKSchiff@PriusOmega@ipsumkyle Imagine if all 7-8 billion people were as stuck in their ways and as immune to progress like Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger, but 100x older. The death of mortality is also the death of change, technological progress and all things new.
@Eva_Kimani_ @RufasKe Yes, Bitcoin is win-win technology. Nobody loses out except those who choose to abstain and even they will still benefit from the technology downstream. Nobody is "punished" for using Bitcoin, which is why it will win.
@Eva_Kimani_ @SangohKelvin@RufasKe Critically, you have more agency in only engaging in the trades you deam beneficial. There is no inflationary rent seeking forcing your hand in engaging in trades, because you fear losing your purchasing power.
@Eva_Kimani_ @SangohKelvin@RufasKe Having something that I want without actually having to produce it is enough of a reward for me. Consensual trade is mutually beneficial and is not zero sum. If you don't want to trade your Bitcoin for something that the elites produced, you don't have to give them your sats.
@Eva_Kimani_ @RufasKe The elites were actually never rewarded by fiat. They are also suffering from the problems with fiat, but myopically it can look like they are benefiting. The elites are also not homogeneous and change over time. The elites today, were not always the elites of yesteryear.
@Eva_Kimani_ @RufasKe I've not heard anyone seriously argue the position you're fighting against. Obviously you will need to spend sats if you are not able to produce anything that you want. But there are third order effects about the repricing of capital that I think you're discounting.
@Eva_Kimani_ @SatStackingPleb@BitPaine@C0caineBicep The inequality in Bitcoin balances amongst humans is actually necessary for Bitcoin's value to have any claim of being a pure price signal. Bitcoin has no way to ensure that all humans have an equal Bitcoin balance precisely because it cannot tell humans apart.
@Eva_Kimani_ @SatStackingPleb@BitPaine@C0caineBicep Inequality is not necessarily a bad thing. Bitcoin leads to greater equality under the law compared to fiat because it applies the same laws to all humans. However, in our current world, Bitcoin will lead to far greater "inequality" in Bitcoin balances.
@brockm@yeolddoc@renepickhardt I can't validate claims in their entirety. I've only performed experiments that have supported some claims, and not supported others. For example, taking some steps to get to another room supports the claim that 1+1 = 2, amongst other claims.
@brockm@yeolddoc@renepickhardt I can't validate it, because I don't have anything to validate. The person making the claim would need to provide some evidence for me to validate, or some actions that are only possible because the claim is true, which I can independently verify.
@brockm@yeolddoc@renepickhardt I learnt all of these things with the help of other humans. The ability to transfer knowledge across generations is what differentiates us from other species. But I did not have to trust other humans completely to learn. I used my own judgement to validate their claims.
@brockm@yeolddoc@renepickhardt I would disagree. Most of the things we think we know aren't based on trust, but on empirical verification of what people are saying. For example, we take aerospace engineering as true because we can see firsthand aircrafts fly, and no of no alternatives.
@joostjgr@jamesob Even if you are just reading a subset of tweets, you'll need to protect yourself against DDOS. Anyone can send anything under #btctxannounce and you'll have to pay to read it, even if the transaction is not valid, or worth the opportunity cost.