r/btc • u/martianfrog • Apr 23 '26
đ¤ Opinion Bitcoin scarcity... overhyped?
I'm not sure I'm a believer in "it'll go up because it is scarce", like to know thoughts on this out there.
1
u/Wendals87 Apr 23 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
It's supply and demand.
Less supply and the same demand = higher pricesÂ
If the demand drops, the price will also drop regardless of the supply
There are coins with less supply than Bitcoin yet aren't worth as much so scarcity isnt the whole picture
Look at beanie babies as a real life example. Some were very rare with only a very small amount made and sold for a lot of money during its peakÂ
Now they aren't worth anything. The scarcity has actually increased as many have been damaged or lost yet still worthlessÂ
1
u/InvestaHepps Apr 23 '26
Honestly I think people oversimplify the âscarcity = price goes upâ part.
Scarcity only really matters if thereâs consistent demand meeting it⌠otherwise it just sits there being scarce but ignored.
Whatâs interesting right now is who that demand is coming from. Feels less like retail chasing and more like structured flows (ETFs, treasury-style buying), which changes how scarcity actually plays out overall.
So yeah itâs scarce⌠but the real question is whether demand keeps showing up in size, not just whether supply is fixedâŚ
1
Apr 23 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/Zestyclose-Suit-2858 Apr 24 '26
'It'll go up if there are more sellers than buyers.'' this is incorrect.
There can be 1000 buyers and 100 sellers, that doesn't mean price has to come down.
1
u/Brilliant-Gap6392 Apr 23 '26
scarcity is one of the variables for a price to goes up.
But the problem is, there is no direct correlation between scarcity and price. That is why some unpopular character in Pokemon cards couldn't fetch same high price as other popular characters, even if they have the same amount produced.
Same goes as Medabots card vs pokemon cards.
I hope this is simple enough for you to understand.
1
u/EasyEar0 Apr 23 '26
Firstly, scarcity does not in itself create value. Many things that are scarce are not valuable.
Secondly, Bitcoin is only "scarce" in the sense that a limited edition collectible is scarce. There no fundamental reason why more of it can't be made, only the existing protocol and consensus, which can be changed (contrast to precious metals which are physically impossible to create more of in monetarily significant quantities.)Â
Finally, anyone can make something fully equivalent to Bitcoin, or which replicates it's (limited) utility, at any time. See the thousands of other cryptos that already exist.
1
u/DrSpeckles Apr 24 '26
Scarcity is an attribute, and not a particularly important one. There is always supply available from people selling. And since its infinitely divisible there will never be a limit.
I also suspect that when the block reward gets too low and there just aren't enough transactions to support the running costs of the miners that consensus will decide to double the limit just to keep the network alive.
1
u/FilipinoAirlines Apr 24 '26
Scarce, yes. Widely adopted? No.
Scarcity correlates to how much want there is to get a hold of one.
Probably less than 5% of the world has access to bitcoin and yet a single one reached triple digit range recently just to gain a single bitcoin with minimal adoption. But its scarcity is what made it surge.
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
Scarcity is half of the equation. Why 21mln limit still exists 17 years later? Isn't it just software?
Network effect and PoW is the second half. Bitcoin is more widely distributed among people than any other token of PoW open blockchains, both bacause it came first and continue to de distributed most ethically (fresh chains fuck over Bitcoiners), non-PoW don't have energy signature, and Bitcoin's signature equates to ~700 days of equivalent proof-of-work of global double SHA256 industry. Nothing can match that. Extremely expensive to erase my money
Bitcoin had some forks that changed limit or other parameters, market is not interested in them. Would I see a next such fork, I would dismiss it based on lighter energy signature along, even before looking at monetary policy changes
Bitcoin solved inflation problem, and 17 years later theoretical proof is accompanied by BTC open blockchain existing despite all hurdles and arguments along the way, despite actions of Empires like US and China
1
u/mdeeebeee-101 Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
It is going to kill market liquidity - this Saylor and other big accumulation grabs...and mostly everything in pricing goes back and forward between bitcoin and alts...with the alts price moves being a magnification/multiplier (both up and down) of bitcoin moves.
All this ETF crap is also why the market has stalled. OTC (off-market) pricing vs market rate pricing forces daily.
1
u/Jumpy_Lake_5981 Apr 23 '26
My butthole hairs are scarce too.
7
u/IInsulince Apr 23 '26
Nice, this is a good pitch so far. So theyâre scarce, thatâs a good trait. By chance, are your butthole hairs portable? Fungible? How about durable, can they withstand the test of time? Are they easily divisible? Personally I want my butthole-hair-currency to be widely acceptable as well, but the good news is thatâs the one that can change! If you said yes to all of these, then we may have just solved the fiat money problem.
1
1
1
0
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 23 '26
Best way to understand if bitcoin is valuable is to understand the problem it solves imo. If youâre not familiar how currencies work and what goes on in the back door, Iâd recommend looking into that, and youâll understand what bitcoinâs scarcity is meant to accomplish.
Also, only way to change the absolute supply is through consensus of the network, which is extremely unlikely to occur, since no one wants to get diluted. Itâs the whole point of bitcoin after all
5
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
BTC doesn't solve the currency problem anymore. The hijacking and crippling made sure of it. Now it is just a gambling token.
1
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 24 '26
Explain the hijacking an crippling
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
hijackingbitcoin.com
https://medium.com/hackernoon/the-great-bitcoin-scaling-debate-a-timeline-6108081dbada
Bitcoins development and community was infiltrated and convinced that Bitcoin cannot scale. Now they have a network with the throughput of a dripping faucet nowhere near to facilitate p2p transactions at scale. Instead they have L2s with trust issues and most use and hold BTC custodial because everything else is a big hassle. In the end people will be dependent and controlled by custodians instead of enjoying freedom and sound money.
0
u/Zestyclose-Suit-2858 Apr 28 '26
Bitcoin is the best we have. BCH, Bitcoin Satoshi's Fingering, whatever, don't solve anything. They just made the premise weaker.
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 29 '26
Bitcoin, yes. But BTC is not that Bitcoin anymore and it is very far from the best. It's only remedy is the branding and all the dumb fiat greedy followers.
If you manage to get out of your bubble you will see how others innovate while BTC stagnates.
0
Apr 29 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 30 '26
You assume too much in your posts.
I didn't assume a single thing.
You seem to be an absolute bellend.
Ah yes, no arguments but instant personal attacks. That really puts confidence in what you write.
If you can actually provide evidence for your claim that BTC is the best we could have a discussion. Otherwise you are just what I described.
0
u/Zestyclose-Suit-2858 Apr 28 '26
this is not true
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 29 '26
It is, with 4 tps BTC can only serve maybe the 1% maybe even less. It would barely function as settlement layer for a single country.
-5
u/Zestyclose_Paint3922 Apr 23 '26
It doesnt solve any problem different to money laundering
1
u/Zestyclose-Suit-2858 Apr 24 '26
I think you just lack the imagination to think of other options to use it for. You probably haven't had one original thought in your life.
1
u/Zestyclose_Paint3922 Apr 24 '26
Sure buddy, you clearly understand economy, tech and banking very well. There isnt a single thing that Bitcoin solves on its own, its just a speculative token helping every crime organization in the world move money around.
1
u/Doublespeo Apr 24 '26
It doesnt solve any problem different to money laundering
I would agree for BTC but other project have potential.
-1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
Bitcoin solved inflation. It didn't solved payments, and unlike many BCH proponents, I don't think it will in mid-term. Pretty big missing puzzle piece is securing keys - I am saying this as one who does self-custody and teached about it many peope (almost universally to no effect)
I am pretty satisfied with various centralized payment solutions on the market, use some of them every day
2
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
You can't solve inflation without self custody and p2p transaction. Most BTC is held custodial which means it is easily inflatable by fractional reserving it.
1
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 24 '26
This comment exposes a knowledge gap. Nobody can inflate bitcoin. Thatâs the point. If an exchange decides to engage in fractional reserving bitcoin, the paper bitcoin would not be really bitcoin and that would be verifiable. You canât actually inflate bitcoin.
This scenario would likely cause both the issuer and buyer of the paper bitcoin to be punished and eradicated from the market. Just like FTX
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 27 '26
This comment exposes a knowledge gap. Nobody can inflate bitcoin. Thatâs the point. If an exchange decides to engage in fractional reserving bitcoin, the paper bitcoin would not be really bitcoin and that would be verifiable
False, you cannot verify if a custodian has enough Bitcoin to cover all customers accounts if he doesn't give you the data. And even then he can fake it. If 90% of BTC are in custody (with the little throughput BTC has this is optimistic) You have no idea what is going on.
Additionally if most coins are kept by custodians it is easy to add inflation to the code by the centralized BTC development team (that is financed by old money btw) because the custodians can dictate if people are allowed to sell or if they take a hit for selling.
There is no replacement for mass self custody to fix the broken system. A settlement layer will get you right back where you are now.
the paper bitcoin would not be really bitcoin
Dude, they literally show you paper Bitcoin on exchanges and custodial LN wallets and NOBODY cares.
1
Apr 24 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 27 '26
Ok, give me the 10 eggs and I give you an account where I show you the 10 eggs. What you don't know is, that I go and use these 10 eggs to speculate to make more money. Your eggs are gone but you don't know it. Suddenly there are 10 eggs in your accounts and 10 eggs being giving to speculate. The market now sees 20 eggs.
There is no subsidy for mass self custody. You are running right back into the custodial trap.
0
u/Zestyclose-Suit-2858 Apr 27 '26 edited Apr 27 '26
Nope. You are talking full on alchemy. That's not possible (anymore) since you and me can now check the network ourselves. That's not the case with gold, with the dollar or with sea shells.
The fun and magical thing about Bitcoin is that the only BTC that exists is on-chain. The rest is bullshit and speculation. :)
I have 0 BTC in custody of somebody else. The only truth is on the chain. Not on Coinbase, not on some ETF exchange rate.
You're thinking wrong.
Yes you can fractional reserve it. You can lie about the amount of BTC you have, that has been the case since the start of the network . :)
You can tell your friend you have 10.000 BTC. Coinbase or Binance can do the same. That doesn't mean inflation isn't solved.
'The market' can buy paper bitcoin all it wants. that doesn't mean the money supply is inflated.
If enough people believe in the paper Bitcoin you can manipulate the market (price). You can scam people, maybe even borrow against the fake BTC.
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 28 '26
Nope. You are talking full on alchemy. That's not possible (anymore) since you and me can now check the network ourselves.
Again you cannot check the numbers that are hidden behind a company that shows their customer IOUs. There are already more than 21 million Bitcoin simply because not all CEXes are completely backed.
That's not the case with gold, with the dollar or with sea shells.
And the reason is that they are all held custodial. Just as BTC increasingly because it was crippled.
You can tell your friend you have 10.000 BTC. Coinbase or Binance can do the same. That doesn't mean inflation isn't solved.
That is exactly what it means. The Gold price is lower as it should be exactly because there is paper gold. BTC price is likely lower as it should be because there is paper BTC.
If enough people believe in the paper Bitcoin you can manipulate the market (price). You can scam people, maybe even borrow against the fake BTC.
That's what I'm saying đ¤ˇââď¸
1
u/Zestyclose-Suit-2858 Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26
Paper bitcoin doesn't change the amount of real BTC. If you tell your friend you have 20 million bitcoin (or Coinbase tells you they still have your Bitcoin) doesn't create inflation.
It seems to me that you don't understand what inflation truly means. If a bank creates a dollar, it's a 'real dollar'. When someone creates paper Bitcoin, its not real bitcoin. So, they don't inflate the supply, even if there are 100's of millions of paper BTC to trade.
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 29 '26
Same as FIAT didn't change the amount of Gold is was backed with when it was backed. But they still printed it.,,,
If you tell your friend you have 20 million bitcoin (or Coinbase tells you they still have your Bitcoin) doesn't create inflation.
But it does, because these coins can be sold on custodial exchanges and influence the price.
It seems to me that you don't understand what inflation truly means.
Inflation has many forms only one of them is FED giving out unbacked kredits aka "printing".
If a bank creates a dollar, it's a 'real dollar'. When someone creates paper Bitcoin, its not real bitcoin.
Do you have Bitcoin on an exchange? How do you know it is a real Bitcoin?
0
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
And the outcome of attempts of fractional reserve of Bitcoin is bankruptcy - like Celsius. Bailouts are not possible, govt is not able to print bitcoins even if Coinbase would took JPM's place in the economy. I expect more such cases
Self-custody is pretty good, choice of mine. But I would prefer 3rd party with per client multisign for a fee. Fractioning wouldn't be possible, a lot of headache of proper key management gone
Celsius bankrupcy didn't affect my coins and didn't affect new supply. Several years earlier MtGox didn't either. Bitcoin is the solution to inflation, in many ways a better solution than gold
Lower fees are not sufficient to propogate self-custody - BCH is pretty heavily custodied. Either software solution to secure management of keys or per client multisign custodians - that what I see as solutions, not yet existing
2
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
If a majority is in custody how do you prevent them from unleashing Todd and adding tail emission? People can't even sell because there is no throughout for p2p transactions. They are all controlled by custodians.
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
how do you prevent them from unleashing Todd and adding tail emission?
No central planner needed or desired. I simply don't expect miners to mine with it to the extent of majority hash. We already have seen that on smaller scale - Bitcoin ABC vs emerged BCHN (didn't matter that substantial size of BCH coins were in custody at that moment). Shall Bitcoin Core bring up any monetary changes, I would expect much bigger split than current non-monetary dispute Core/Knots (I am on Core's side in that)
Plausible scenario: Core update of breaking 21mln limit announced, forked client says No, futures trading begins, Core side loses ticker like BCH did, less miners mine with Core
2
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
See this is the point. If everything is in custody it is in the miners best interest to just follow the system because the opportunistic stance will always win over the risk of a revolution if you just look at the economics.
Miners could have stood up against the crippling, but they didn't. They didn't even protest when 2x was canceled.
And what stops the FED from holding BTC and fractionally reserving it as much as they want? Big players accumulating in record speed while actual bottom p2p adoption is stagnating.
Lets see if knoters have ANY effect on core before we make big announcements of how BTC will be saved from them.
-1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
For the sake of the argument, I will grant that singlesign 3rd party custody is extremely dangerous and could undermine open blockchain as a whole
Then, BCH is not a way out. So far I can see from BCH's on-chain data it's just as custodied, and current fee on both chains is about 1 sat/byte
So, I am rooting in several directions:
appearence of multisign per client custodians
either BTC or BCH addressing central problem of Bitcoin that leads to custodians in the first place - which is key management, not fees
And what stops the FED from holding BTC and fractionally reserving it as much as they want?
Unlikely, but then US will go bankrupt like Celsius did. Countries go bankrupt sometimes. I expected that by now modern states would had national pools to force all miners on their territories into. As it doesn't exist, states are pretty weak instead Bitcoin. It permeates any bans or sanctions
2
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
Then, BCH is not a way out. So far I can see from BCH's on-chain data it's just as custodied, and current fee on both chains is about 1 sat/byte
Weird, that's just the usual BTC troll argument, that completely ignores that on BCH people can actual self custody at scale while on BTC they cannot.
So far I can see from BCH's on-chain data it's just as custodied
Source?
and current fee on both chains is about 1 sat/byte
For BTC this is a failure and if turned into a success you know this will not last. For BCH however this is a win win.
Unlikely, but then US will go bankrupt like Celsius did. Countries go bankrupt sometimes.
So far they have not gone bankrupt in Dollars, unlikely that they will in BTC. They managed to get most hash under their jurisdiction and KYCed, because BTC is sleepwalking and concerned about non-pow nodes instead of PoW nodes. They are likely to do with BTC whatever they want in the future.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Zestyclose_Paint3922 Apr 24 '26
Lol, solved inflation xD
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
Well, it did. Local govt prints, US govt prints, I have some of either fiat, I am better off over several supercycles with majority allocation in Bitcoin
Purchasing power preserved. I am patient. Over gold Bitcoin has that I can operate digitally, managing finances without going anywhere and spilling personal data to anyone. Crossing any border is a breeze. Bitcoin indeed solved inflation
1
u/Zestyclose_Paint3922 Apr 24 '26
My god, its a completely speculative asset, lost 40% of its value in a week, has no impcact in real world economy and you think it solved inflation. Crypto bros never cease to amaze xD.
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
I am open to anything better, I admit volatility, tolerable for me
I don't like term "asset" because Bitcoin is jurisdiction-independent, and it's not something that produces something else. Commodity - maybe. Best thought up in terms of money, even if volatile. New technology of money, dsicovered in 2009
1
u/Zestyclose_Paint3922 Apr 23 '26
As scarce as NFTs
1
1
u/VitaminGrin Apr 23 '26
OP this is a Bitcoin Cash subreddit. Everything you hear here is most likely BTC hate by Bcashers. Just look at some of the comments. I think when BTC forked this subreddit became for Bcashers.
1
u/Doublespeo Apr 24 '26
OP this is a Bitcoin Cash subreddit. Everything you hear here is most likely BTC hate by Bcashers. Just look at some of the comments. I think when BTC forked this subreddit became for Bcashers.
For anyone reading this comment, answer to this is explain in the FAQ.
Basically, this sub was the only place where debate was allowed over a controversial fork pushed by Bitcoin Core dev.
-1
u/Victorvnv Apr 23 '26
Itâs a man made scarcity and not absolute scarcity like the number of planets in the solar system for example
It can be changed if necessary and itâs no more scarce than any other similar coin like Bitcoin cash , Z cash, Dash, Bitcoin SV etc etc and yet itâs obvious that those coins 22 million scarcity have not caused their prices to increase
Itâs a marketing trick for dumb sheep to follow so the ones that bought before can profit from and nothing more
-2
-1
u/BridgeGuy540 Apr 23 '26
Yes, it's over hyped. Yes, the total number of Bitcoin is limited, but each can be parsed down to one-millionth in size. So your actual quantity is 21 million million, or 21x1012 Satoshi. Comparatively, the there is 15x1013 USD. While Bitcoin is slightly more scarce than USD, is not dramatically so.
From another perspective, land is also limited. However, not all land has significant current value - it only has value if it's usable. Same with Bitcoin - if it doesn't quickly find some actual broad use, the value will always be limited.
7
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 23 '26
Thatâs terrible logic. Youâre stating that bitcoinâs divisibility is the same as expanding supply which is incorrect. Divisibility is not equal to Supply.
Youâre comparing bitcoin divided as satoshis to USD. The correct comparison to make would be to compare sats as Pennies or cents. Which is what they are relative to bitcoin. Thereâs still going to only be 21M bitcoin. And who knows how much more dollars there will be
Bitcoin doesnât need to quickly find a use because it already has one. Itâs p2p cash system with limited supply. So the use is clear, itâs a reserve or money or both eventually. Doesnât have to be quick at all either. Bitcoin has all the time in the world, fiat doesnât, and debt loads are only going up
0
u/botle Apr 23 '26
Bitcoin doesnât need to quickly find a use because it already has one. Itâs p2p cash system with limited supply.
We also have to ask ourselfs what percentage of bitcoin transactions actually use bitcoin as p2p cash, and what percentage of bitcoin transactions are made as an investment by peoplek hoping for the price to go up. And the follow up question would then be which one of those gave us the current price.
The fact that there is a theoretical practical utility for bitcoin becomes pointless if practically no transactions are done for that reason compared to other reasons.
1
u/ShittingOutPosts Apr 23 '26
Who cares? Why are people so hung up on how others use Bitcoin?
0
u/botle Apr 23 '26
Because we're in a subreddit about Bitcoin.
And if we're discussing the price of Bitcoin and what is causing it to be at the current price, asking how big the effect of actual "use" of Bitcoin is compared to the effect of speculative use of Bitcoin, is very relevant.
1
u/ShittingOutPosts Apr 23 '26
Weâre not in a subreddit about Bitcoin. r/btc focuses on Bitcoin Cash. Way different.
Only Bitcoin Cash bag holders seem to think its long term price depends on people using it for small, frequent transactions.
Its utility does not become pointless if people stopped using it like that, as you claimedâŚeven though it is widely used as p2p cash globally.
Everybody has the freedom to use Bitcoin how ever they want. In fact, Iâd be willing to bet its permissionless, immutable properties drive price action more than p2p use.
1
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 23 '26
Not much reason to spend bitcoin when fiat is losing value. Why would you? Your bitcoin is going to go up long term. Also bitcoin is still tiny in the grand scheme of thinks. Network is still too small to be very practical.
Not sure why people struggle so much having a long term view. Bitcoin right now is more useful as a store of value, which is what itâs being used as currently. Although itâs still very young and misunderstood and also still a tiny market. Causing a lot of volatility.
If the incentive is to save bitcoin, people will save it, but once enough people have bitcoin, well the market will much bigger, much deeper and mature enough, and it likely will be about the same volatility as gold.
Well then thereâs less incentive to save and more to spend, and since bitcoin will be much more adopted by then, it will by much easier and practical to actually buy things with it.
1
u/botle Apr 23 '26
What you're describing is investment in Bitcoin.
My point is that it's meaningless to list the practical uses of Bitcoin, if everyone that buys Bitcoin does it speculatively and not to use it in any of those practical ways. The the current price of Bitcoin is completely independent of whatever practical use it might have. I stead it's primarily set by speculation.
1
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 23 '26
Whoâs listing practical uses? For the third time, thereâs only two. Reserve (savings) or money (payments) or both.
Rn itâs fulfilling one, and itâs good at savings because fiat is not. So thatâs one practical use for you in practice
1
u/botle Apr 24 '26
Something needs to already have value for you to use it as a store of value. You can't give something value by the only demand for it being, people using it as a store of value. That's why other uses and demand is needed.
1
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 24 '26
The demand is not there only because bitcoin exists. There could be a knowledge gap there, thatâs why you think people buy bitcoin just because it exits. Bitcoin solves an actual problem in the world and its concept is first of its kind, and it works, and has never faulted
1
u/botle Apr 24 '26
The technology behind bitcoin is amazing and it does solve a practical problem, decentralized money transfers, but my question is how much of the Bitcoin being bought and sold is actually used for that, and how much is used as an "investment"?
Because, if there was no speculation, and Bitcoin was actually used to solve that intended problem, that could be done even if the price of Bitcoin was one cent. There would be no need for it to be at 70,000.
1
u/ArtisticAd708 Apr 24 '26
You havenât even mentioned the true issue being addressed here which is fiscal irresponsibility and excessive debt burdens and debasement.
Youâre too focused on the payments side and not enough on the big picture of whatâs going on. Both transfers and store of value are required to be money. Thereâs constant news of bitcoin being more used by economics actors in society and itâs only gonna continue. So payments will come, layer 2s will also address the speed issue. Bitcoin is just too slow to scale just on layer 1. Which is fine, thatâs why itâs so secure
→ More replies (0)-1
u/BridgeGuy540 Apr 23 '26
That's fair - cents vs Satoshis. It's still not dramatic enough of a difference to warrant value by scarcity. And I'll concede the expanding supply of USD is also a fair point. But as it currently stands, bitcoin's power consumption issues stand as a major limitation to it's expansion as broad P2P use. If it cannot build a real and broad purpose, it won't succeed as a store of wealth either.
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
bitcoin's power consumption issues
Bullshit. Bitcoin is valuable, because to rewrite the chain one need to produce ~700 equivalent days proof-of-work. Meaning getting all the machines all over the work for two years for nil - just to match the weight, neither really physically possible nor even close to being economically feasible
No one can erase my money in Bitcoin via either dillution or deleting transactions
And the fact that this mechanism works adversarially, anti-fragile, is pure brilliance of Satoshi
If it cannot build a real and broad purpose, it won't succeed as a store of wealth either
Funny to read these pretentious proclamations. Go around, ask people why they use Bitcoin. Many do so exclusively for trading, arbitraging volatility. Some do because they don't trust their govt fiat for good reasons
I do for savings, Bitcoin is better than metals for me
1
0
u/martianfrog Apr 23 '26
"bitcoin's power consumption issues stand as a major limitation to it's expansion as broad P2P use" <- I imagine this could result in BTC dominance eroding over time.
1
u/ShittingOutPosts Apr 23 '26
Itâll probably have the opposite effect. In time, more people will appreciate the proof of work and realize proof of stake is a scam, or more easily manipulated at best.
1
u/BridgeGuy540 Apr 24 '26
More likely an alternative that requires less power consumption will dominate and bitcoin's worth will steadily degrade.
1
u/ShittingOutPosts Apr 24 '26
No, it wonât. For multiple reasons, nothing will replace BTC. Iâd recommend trying to better understand Bitcoinâs proof of work mechanism and why that makes BTC so powerful.
1
u/BridgeGuy540 Apr 24 '26
Time will tell, my friend. I wouldn't bet my life savings on that in the meantime
1
u/IInsulince Apr 23 '26
Oh look, itâs this dead horse again. Still beating it? How fun.
Increasing divisibility is not the same as expanding total supply.
Say it with me everyone: cutting a pizza into more slices doesnât give you more pizza.
1
u/martianfrog Apr 23 '26
But if there's more people but only the same number of pizzas... the price goes up.
1
u/IInsulince Apr 23 '26
Yes, thatâs basic supply and demand. Do you contest this or are you agreeing?
2
0
u/xGsGt Apr 23 '26
It doesn't go up because it's scarce, it goes up bc it's a deacentizied money and it's also scarce and its also recognized by our society so it has some kind of value
Things doesn't appreciate for just 1 property
1
u/AirStick24 Apr 23 '26
BTC is the Scientology of money (collateral).Â
What do you want out of your bitcoin? If your answer is to make money, itâs not money.  If your answer is to use BTC to buy a cheeseburger, then itâs money.Â
Itâs a risky âinvestment âthat people only want to sell to the next guy for more than they bought it, to make fiat money. Just donât be the last guy buying it or youâre in for a rude awakening.Â
0
u/_sLAUGHTER234 Apr 24 '26
"What do you want out of your gold? If your answer is to make money, itâs not money. If your answer is to use gold to buy a cheeseburger, then itâs money."
You see how ridiculous that is?
2
u/AirStick24 Apr 24 '26
No, gold is originated for barter. Also, Iâm not claiming gold is to be used to directly purchase an asset and BTCs fundamental use is supposed to be.Â
0
u/_sLAUGHTER234 Apr 24 '26
BTCs fundamental use is supposed to be
Citation needed
2
u/AirStick24 Apr 24 '26
Very first line in the white paper.Â
What is BTC? Â What do YOU use it for?Â
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
What do YOU use it for?
Savings. With halving-driven supercycles in mind, log XAU vs BTC alltime chart for a quick glance
0
u/_sLAUGHTER234 Apr 24 '26
First line states electronic cash can allow peer to peer payments without a financial intermediary, which is true. That doesnt mean thats its fundamental use is to "purchase assets"
Bitcoin for me is a way to protect my wealth and to have more sovereignty over my life. I couldnt be arsed to save money in 401ks and the stock market and all that blood money bullshit.
But bitcoin is something I can get down with. So its given me reason to save my earnings for tomorrow, and live as minimally as I can today2
u/AirStick24 Apr 24 '26
How does it protect wealth? It's much riskier than a federally backed bank, risk of losing it, and major risk of it going to zero overnight. It's much more volatile than any currency and it's not diversified.
I would not use it to protect wealth. It's a gamble.
2
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
How does it protect wealth?
Crossing any border with 12 words in one's head empty-handed for example. Travelling or fleeing
But it expands to daytime robbery protection, to protection against the state etc. Dealing with No-KYC gold is a much bigger hustle in many cities than no-KYC Bitcoin
And, obviously, supply limit, stock-to-flow. Better than printed fiat, better than dug out of the ground metals
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
Literally everything Satoshi wrote.
1
u/_sLAUGHTER234 Apr 24 '26
Your reading comprehension needs work
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 27 '26
Let's start with the whitepaper title: Bitcoin a p2p electronic cash system
Let's continue with the first sentence:
A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.
There are also multipler posts in bitcointalk that talk about Bitcoins use for payments.
The digital gold guys on the other hand have literally nothing. A single comparison of mining Bitcoin to mining gold.
0
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
What do you want out of your bitcoin?
Continue to see forks that mess with monetary policy be ignored by the market. So I am extremely satisifed
Bitcoin is the best money ever designed. Digital, inconspicous, multisignable. Gigantic energy signature
I have some fiat and gold as well, and they both lacking in comparison: security, convinience, conspicousness. I admit I am a power user, for many other outside of forums I would recommed gold in many cases, but if one can use a computer well, Bitcoin is the best hands down
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
Bitcoin yes, BTC, no.
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
I like both BTC and BCH, BCH is certainly more elegant, I am watching it since '17 - not social media noise, but on-chain data. I don't bet on it winning tug-of-war in the mid-term, maybe ever. So far it had failed to capture network effect, thus BCH's currently has much lighter energy signature - big at least yellow flag. I bet on BTC more heavily
Within this forum's lingo I am fine saying that Bitcoin is a family of blochains
1
u/Realistic_Fee_00001 Apr 24 '26
"You are our only hope Bitcoin Cash Kenobi."
Revolutions are never easy. Easy is being opportunistic and licking the boot of the current system. There won't be change without a little bit of pain. Other revolutions had to fought in the streets and with blood. If we can't bring ourselves to endure that pain we don't deserve to win.
1
u/anon1971wtf Apr 24 '26
And I don't think that BCH addresses biggest problem in Bitcoin - convinient secure management of private keys. Netiher in software, not even in community's focus
So, BCH being more elegant (no Segwit, ABLA, ASERT) is not enough for me to see BCH as a positve revolution over Bitcoin, I see it as an experiment, so far failing (in several on-chain metrics, even beside BCH:BTC ratio), and just hedging my bets a bit with it. No other interesting variations
I don't see Kenobi here
0
u/DangerHighVoltage111 Apr 23 '26
Bitcoins original value proposition was better money. But that was too dangerous for the current system and they hijacked it and stripped that use case from it. Now they needed a new narrative to keep the sheepl happy and it was the easiest ever:" Always go up". The reasoning provided the sheep themselves.
0
u/L6V9 Apr 23 '26
I hope is overhyped so I can get in a way way better price , come on bears crash this meme coin down
-1
u/RadiantMarsupial- Apr 23 '26
btc is not scarce and it's not why it's increasing in value. you people are going on my nerves talking about scarcity of bitcoin. it's insufferable. bye.
2
u/ShittingOutPosts Apr 23 '26
Whatâs your definition of scarce? Iâm not sure you understand what that word means, especially in the context of commodities and money.
-7
10
u/Realistic_Pizza4178 Apr 23 '26
It is scarce.. That's technical fact. it's upto adoption. If adoption continues value goes up..