I contend that sustained issuance is in fact GOOD for a cryptography- and blockchain-based currency like BTC. The function of currency is to be spent, not accumulated. As long as it depreciates at a moderate to slow pace, there is no downside or "robbery" in that. On the contrary, as coins get lost (that applies to physical cash too), they should be replaced with newly issued ones, to keep prices stable. In other words, an uncapped supply would be ideal or even required -- if you really want BTC to be currency. That idea is at odds with the concept of a store of value, which definitely requires and benefits from a capped maximum supply. So not only we must separate money and State, but also currency from store of value. View quoted note →

I have very short patience with cretins who want to play it cool replying with edgy oneliners AND refuse to get to the point if I decide to ask for further elaboration. If you have something to say, just fucking say it. I'm fine with opposing points of view. I'm not fine with fedora-wearing cunts who have watched The Joker too many times and think they can waste mine.

That's when we peaked. I truly miss it. View quoted note →

Florida passed the ballots on weed and abortion with similar numbers as Trump got. That is exactly my vibe. I'm seriously getting self-psyched now about the remote idea of moving there. This may actually end up happening.

Because GenX is the most basedest generation.

Too many bitcoiners make the same misttake this man says he used to make: money is currency. Not necessarily. BTC sucks balls as currency. But the good news is that it doesn't NEED to be currency to be money. Let other people and projects who do it better take care of that, who cares. View quoted note →

I always say that BTC's number one milestone to be considered successful must be surpassing gold's market capitalization. Not so long ago, we were looking at $10 T => BTC = $475k. That's been my mental frame for years. Today I see gold is $18 T, which means BTC = $860k. Just as with real inflation, these are figures that we have to keep in mind if we want to be realistic and rational. I'm as bullish as ever, but I don't want to fool myself into very costly mistakes. I am not one of these BTC millionaires who "don't care about price" (but spend in BTC and want you to do the same). I am SAVING and INVESTING in BTC as my retirement fund. Very different outlook, and I simply can't fuck up.

Fuck France, fuck Europe, fuck this whole dying shithole of a fascist collectivist continent.

Client Challenge

This drivel is taught in universities all over the West. It was taught to me during my post-grade studies, and I keep seeing it repeated, over and over. It's usually paired with the even more preposterous idea that the gold standard was responsible too for the Great Depression. Facts: 1. The Federal Reserve came into existence in 1913. That's 16 years before the 1929 collapse. In case anyone is missing the point: the Fed is the CENTRAL PLANNING agent in charge of monetary policy. Thus, by the time the great Depression hit, the "laissez faire" had long been gone from the money and financial markets, and we had entered the UNFREE market phase. 2. Immediately after the creation of the FEd, oh surprise, WW1 begins in Europe and the Gold Standard is suspended. Again, that's more than a decade before the 1929 events. That was precisely HOW the powers at war were able to escalate and sustain the war to the levels of unprecedented devastation that they did. That's also what caused the subsequent hyperinflation, instability and chaos in the economies of all developed nations during the 20's. 3. Every single case of "successful" "social welfare system" in the developed world can be traced back to the spoils of a time when there was a limited government and a small state, with increased levels of economic freedom that allowed for massive capital accumulation. The "social programs" that socialist apologists love to talk about, like those of the 70's and 80's in Scandinavia, are indisputably all under that category. The "welfare state"programs were paid for and kept alive with the accumulated progress and wealth from the previous "program-less" era, and invariably squandered during the "program-on" one. Most of those countries if not all have in fact corrected course during the past couple of decades. Again, see Sweden for instance. View quoted note →