YES

CointestMod

#Web3 Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 2nd place in the Web3 Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 2nd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Web 3: A failure in progress. > > ​ > > Web 3 promise of a fully decentralized web is an absurdity which won't take off for a very long time. I'm going to tackle a few simple points which explain why Web 3 is a ridiculous concept. > > ​ > > # Introduction: What the ???? is Web 3 > > According to wikipedia: > > >Web3 (also known as Web 3.0\[1\]\[2\]\[3\]) is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web which incorporates concepts such as decentralization, blockchain technologies, and token-based economics.\[4\] Some technologists and journalists have contrasted it with Web 2.0, wherein they say data and content are centralized in a small group of companies sometimes referred to as "Big Tech".\[5\] The term "Web3" was coined in 2014 by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood, and the idea gained interest in 2021 from cryptocurrency enthusiasts, large technology companies, and venture capital firms.\[5\]\[6\] > > > >Some commentators argue that Web3 will provide increased data security, scalability, and privacy for users and combat the influence of large technology companies.\[7\] They also raise concerns about the decentralized web component of Web3, citing the potential for low moderation and the proliferation of harmful content.\[7\] Some have expressed concerns over the centralization of wealth to a small group of investors and individuals,\[8\] or a loss of privacy due to more expansive data collection.\[9\] Others, such as Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey, have argued that Web3 only serves as a buzzword or marketing term.\[10\]\[11\]\[12\] > > [Web 3 Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3) > > ​ > > So from here we can see that Web3 is understood as different concepts which are all more absurd than the other. In this small essay I'm going to explain why a fully blockchain internet is bad, why token-based economics is bad for users, why lack of centralized authorities makes it bad for everyone. Of course there is a place for blockchain based applications in the worldwide web. But acting as if Web3 was the next iteration of online interaction just as Web2 was is an utter absurdity as will be shown in the conclusion by leveraging all the arguments I will deploy. > > ​ > > # Blockchain internet: Imutability or privacy = wtf > > ​ > > The problem of a blockchain internet is twofold. First one is imutability, which means that nothing can be deleted. YES right now we should still think that nothing is really deleted when we post something on the internet BUT the imutability of blockchain means that any records tied to our real identity would be there forever. > > The second aspect is that any privacy layered part of the internet would obviously descend into a fully 4chan degeneracy. I don't see how this is an improvment for any of us. Moderation and rules are, after all, why this cointest works for example. > > ​ > > Also I'm not even sure that national agencies or the European Union would accept that private companies could hold data related to your accounts which aren't destroyable. > > Blockchain integration is neat when it is not a concept used for data. For example, the blockchain integration on reddit for NFT avatars or funny stuff like moons is neat. But the vision of Web3 advanced by advocates is not this one. > > ​ > > # Token-based economics: Pay For Play ? > > One of the big ideas for Web3 that was popping off recently was the Dogecoin twitter in which people would have to pay gas fees to post tweets. So the more people are using doge the most valuable it becomes. Which means that Twitter would become more and more expensive. The sheer exclusion of 3rd world users is insane. Token-based economics integrated for every interaction is not the way forward. > > # You hated skipping ads, you'll love smart contracts pop-ups for everything. > > Now we hate having to do multiple clicks when only one would be optimal. Now imagine posting something online and having to wait for a smart contract to show up and sign it. If you can see how obnoxious that would be, then you know that Web3 is not going to replace Web 2 Anytime soon. > > ​ > > # Centralization means rules and moderation. > > Having a centralized web means that there are rules coming from the top. If the rules become obnoxious, then a competitor can create a plateform to try to catch the users searching for a better plateform. Of course, there is no interoperability in the current web so migrating your account can mean losing access to your old data videos and history, which in turns makes user reluctant to shop for new plateforms. But the lack of moderation and terms of services would not solve this in anyway. We all know that there are people of all ages and very immature people of all ages online. Rules makes this shared place viable. > > Decentralizing rules and a lack of content moderation is nothing to strive for in our day and age. > > # Conclusion: Like electricity or language, the web is searching the path of least resistance. > > Web 2 showed that users are always looking for the path of least resistance, which means minimal effort. In language we strive for simplification. Over a long period of time language gets simplified because it makes us using less brain power and muscle power to convey meaning. Web2 through plateforms, rendered obsolete the need for everyone to have and manage their own website. In exchange big plateforms made billions. Without the cripsy sleekness and simpleness of web2, a new concept for the worldwide web is dead on arrival. > > This is the simple truth, web2 is easy to use, web3 is complicated mess with tons of problems. > > Blockchains have real utility but people need to stop reinventing the wheel and start investing in cool uses. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/z9o1nt/general_concepts_web3_conarguments_december_2022/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive##wiki_web3) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/189gonw/daily_crypto_discussion_december_3_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/188qcee/daily_crypto_discussion_december_2_2023_gmt0/).

FlagFootballSaint

Congratulations. This is exactly the way to go One advice though: this "industry" is a roulette and YES it can still implode - therefore if you EVER are +50%, cash this surplus out so the WORST that could ever happen to you is to lose just the half of your investment.

SynthToshi

Guys, Don't Rage! We all have different points of view and that's what makes the reddit page great. One of the core principles of Bitcoin is decentralization. Bitcoin operates on a decentralized network of nodes, and its value is not controlled by any single entity or government. Some argue that introducing an ETF, which is regulated by financial authorities, could centralize control over Bitcoin and undermine its decentralized nature. Another Important thought as always is, "Not your keys, not your crypto" which is a super fundamental principle in our world of crypto that underscores the importance of users having control over their private keys to ensure ownership and security of their digital assets. So, Do I think BTC needs a ETF ? F...K NO. Bitcoin was designed to operate without third party intermediaries, embodying a peer to peer system where users transact directly without the need for middlemen. ​ BUT will it be good for the Hodl and die hard btc bois? F...K YES! ETF exposure can provide mainstream investors with a regulated and accessible avenue to invest in Bitcoin, potentially increasing liquidity and market stability. ​ Bottom Line, If newcomers choose not to secure their own keys and face losses, it is a consequence meant to highlight their lack of understanding about how the Bitcoin system operates. But if a ETF is going to boost the price to heaven I'm all for it.

GiverTakerMaker

YES! Troll souls are fetch great prices in the current market - Sell now before the price dips because all the other trolls start selling their souls too.

Choppo8the8don

YES

Miladran

#The answer is YES ,Stop asking

BraidRuner

YES the education you get in real life will be invaluable

extrastone

YES! That's a lot better than most people. My recommendation is to wait until you have 100 times the withdrawal fee until you withdraw your bitcoin to an outside device without viruses. Bonus if the device is only used for bitcoin. I recommend against getting a hardware wallet until you have more.

CointestMod

#Web3 Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 2nd place in the Web3 Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 2nd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Web 3: A failure in progress. > > ​ > > Web 3 promise of a fully decentralized web is an absurdity which won't take off for a very long time. I'm going to tackle a few simple points which explain why Web 3 is a ridiculous concept. > > ​ > > # Introduction: What the ???? is Web 3 > > According to wikipedia: > > >Web3 (also known as Web 3.0\[1\]\[2\]\[3\]) is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web which incorporates concepts such as decentralization, blockchain technologies, and token-based economics.\[4\] Some technologists and journalists have contrasted it with Web 2.0, wherein they say data and content are centralized in a small group of companies sometimes referred to as "Big Tech".\[5\] The term "Web3" was coined in 2014 by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood, and the idea gained interest in 2021 from cryptocurrency enthusiasts, large technology companies, and venture capital firms.\[5\]\[6\] > > > >Some commentators argue that Web3 will provide increased data security, scalability, and privacy for users and combat the influence of large technology companies.\[7\] They also raise concerns about the decentralized web component of Web3, citing the potential for low moderation and the proliferation of harmful content.\[7\] Some have expressed concerns over the centralization of wealth to a small group of investors and individuals,\[8\] or a loss of privacy due to more expansive data collection.\[9\] Others, such as Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey, have argued that Web3 only serves as a buzzword or marketing term.\[10\]\[11\]\[12\] > > [Web 3 Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3) > > ​ > > So from here we can see that Web3 is understood as different concepts which are all more absurd than the other. In this small essay I'm going to explain why a fully blockchain internet is bad, why token-based economics is bad for users, why lack of centralized authorities makes it bad for everyone. Of course there is a place for blockchain based applications in the worldwide web. But acting as if Web3 was the next iteration of online interaction just as Web2 was is an utter absurdity as will be shown in the conclusion by leveraging all the arguments I will deploy. > > ​ > > # Blockchain internet: Imutability or privacy = wtf > > ​ > > The problem of a blockchain internet is twofold. First one is imutability, which means that nothing can be deleted. YES right now we should still think that nothing is really deleted when we post something on the internet BUT the imutability of blockchain means that any records tied to our real identity would be there forever. > > The second aspect is that any privacy layered part of the internet would obviously descend into a fully 4chan degeneracy. I don't see how this is an improvment for any of us. Moderation and rules are, after all, why this cointest works for example. > > ​ > > Also I'm not even sure that national agencies or the European Union would accept that private companies could hold data related to your accounts which aren't destroyable. > > Blockchain integration is neat when it is not a concept used for data. For example, the blockchain integration on reddit for NFT avatars or funny stuff like moons is neat. But the vision of Web3 advanced by advocates is not this one. > > ​ > > # Token-based economics: Pay For Play ? > > One of the big ideas for Web3 that was popping off recently was the Dogecoin twitter in which people would have to pay gas fees to post tweets. So the more people are using doge the most valuable it becomes. Which means that Twitter would become more and more expensive. The sheer exclusion of 3rd world users is insane. Token-based economics integrated for every interaction is not the way forward. > > # You hated skipping ads, you'll love smart contracts pop-ups for everything. > > Now we hate having to do multiple clicks when only one would be optimal. Now imagine posting something online and having to wait for a smart contract to show up and sign it. If you can see how obnoxious that would be, then you know that Web3 is not going to replace Web 2 Anytime soon. > > ​ > > # Centralization means rules and moderation. > > Having a centralized web means that there are rules coming from the top. If the rules become obnoxious, then a competitor can create a plateform to try to catch the users searching for a better plateform. Of course, there is no interoperability in the current web so migrating your account can mean losing access to your old data videos and history, which in turns makes user reluctant to shop for new plateforms. But the lack of moderation and terms of services would not solve this in anyway. We all know that there are people of all ages and very immature people of all ages online. Rules makes this shared place viable. > > Decentralizing rules and a lack of content moderation is nothing to strive for in our day and age. > > # Conclusion: Like electricity or language, the web is searching the path of least resistance. > > Web 2 showed that users are always looking for the path of least resistance, which means minimal effort. In language we strive for simplification. Over a long period of time language gets simplified because it makes us using less brain power and muscle power to convey meaning. Web2 through plateforms, rendered obsolete the need for everyone to have and manage their own website. In exchange big plateforms made billions. Without the cripsy sleekness and simpleness of web2, a new concept for the worldwide web is dead on arrival. > > This is the simple truth, web2 is easy to use, web3 is complicated mess with tons of problems. > > Blockchains have real utility but people need to stop reinventing the wheel and start investing in cool uses. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/z9o1nt/general_concepts_web3_conarguments_december_2022/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive##wiki_web3) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18744v4/daily_crypto_discussion_november_30_2023_gmt0/).

moonRekt

YES

derBouwer

I wish I had someone to tell me to buy bitcoin when I was 16... so.. YES, you should

Just1_More

YES! I thought I was the only one who shared this. Cheers mate

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/186b2er/daily_crypto_discussion_november_29_2023_gmt0/).

VividEdge

YES

Yodel_And_Hodl_Mode

**YES.** I bailed on Ledger and I'll never go back. Ledger can't be trusted. Here's a summary of why, with links. 1: Ledger's word can't be trusted. The following was a lie: > Your keys are always stored on your device and never leave it > SOURCE: [btchip, Ledger Co-Founder, on May 14th, 2023](https://np.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/13gs0xn/using_ledger_with_3rd_party_wallets/jk34kcn/) ...that's a lie because they added key extraction firmware to users devices. 2: Ledger's code can't be trusted. It can't be verified: > There's no backdoor and I obviously can't prove it > SOURCE: [btchip, Ledger owner & co-founder](https://np.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/13itm7u/is_there_a_backdoor_yes_or_no/jkbvys7/) ...they can't prove it because their code is closed source. 3: Ledger can't be trusted with your privacy. Their CEO said so: > "If, for you, your privacy is of the utmost importance, please do not use that product, for sure." > SOURCE: [Ledger CEO Pascal Gauthier, on video](https://youtu.be/M3VjQUcyZSY?t=2342) ...he said that about one of his own products. For sure. 4: Ledger's security can't be trusted. They've been hacked: > Ledger wallet users face mounting home invasion and other scareware threats as hacker dumps private customer information online. > SOURCE: [Cointelegraph, December 24th, 2020](https://cointelegraph.com/news/ledger-data-leak-a-simple-mistake-exposed-270k-crypto-wallet-buyers) ...they can't even keep *their* data secure. Don't trust them with your coins. 5: Ledger's security has been hacked, and yet... > "The bombshell here is the explicit confirmation that Ledger themselves hold the master decryption key for all Ledger Recover users." > SOURCE: [@sethforprivacy](https://twitter.com/sethforprivacy/status/1671532787294191618) ...what could possibly go wrong, eh? 6: Ledger refuses to answer questions. They're [deleting questions](https://np.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/13itm7u/is_there_a_backdoor_yes_or_no/jkbvys7/) in comments on their sub. They're [shadowbanning](https://np.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/144439c/ledger_please_answer_this_question/) the users who ask them. They're [scrubbing their website](https://np.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/13z1yew/ledger_updates_academy_articles/) to remove claims they've been making for years. They're dirty. Ledger Can't Be Trusted.

gr8ful4

YES. SeedSigner and MoneroSigner is where the OGs are now.

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/185hzo1/daily_crypto_discussion_november_28_2023_gmt0/).

Bandit_Quick

YES...I bought a bunch of shares on Jan 3rd...we be like 3x (if it wasn't for the shares bought at $200 ish in 2021)

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/184p1n3/daily_crypto_discussion_november_27_2023_gmt0/).

mobitumbl

You should predict it on the market then. It's only play-money. I'm someone predicting NO on the market I linked, trying to find more people who will bet YES so I can profit more

mobitumbl

I agree completely. I'm one of the main people betting down the prediction market I linked. I'm hoping I can get some people from this thread who disagree with us to participate so I have more people to bet against. Right now it's down to 4% so I can't get much out of it until more people bet YES.

mobitumbl

I personally think that the technology will in fact be a huge failure. Part of the reason I'm posting here is that I'm one of the people betting NO on the prediction market I linked, and I'm trying to get more people to bet against. It's down to 4%, so I get basically nothing from continuing to bet NO until more people bet YES.

mobitumbl

If people own cryptocurrency as part of an investment portfolio, even if they aren't the ones who decide what goes in their investment portfolio, that would be enough to resolve the prediction market YES. A derivative stock would not. They would have to own the actual currency.

mobitumbl

That would be enough to resolve the prediction market YES. The criteria says that they have to be making use of the crypto, not that they have to know they are making use of it. If you are confident crypto will be a widespread part of investment portfolios you should take a couple seconds to bet the market up.

Quixote0630

No. We understood. Still voted YES. Throw your toys out of the pram some more. Fact is, you are part of a miniscule minority who opposed this.

mobitumbl

The prediction market linked is predicting whether or not it will be AT LEAST half. It's currently at 5% chance. If you think that's inaccurate you should throw down some YES stocks. Takes one or two clicks to make an account

mobitumbl

The prediction market in the OP is currently at 5% chance. It's only play money, if you really think that's the case you should throw down some YES stocks

passabc111

Given that btc will be at 1 million price tag soon after ETF approval, YES.

utterbbq2

Erhm, basically what you are saying is that Gold never going to be a currency? YES you are right, thats why gold or any other "Store of value" is NOT currency today. BTC and ETH are used for other things therefore. But feel free to look and talk about any of the other cryptos that have zero fees and are instant, for example coins that VISA with more are investing in.

Fantastic-Ad548

Congrats to the YES camp. Almost 170k wallets voted in this proposal, that’s crazy.

irisuniverse

YES!!

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18363n3/daily_crypto_discussion_november_25_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18363n3/daily_crypto_discussion_november_25_2023_gmt0/).

freshasadaisy33

Fuck YES. If you understand what is happening g and truly have done your research and have been thinking about doing it, I would say to do it. First answer these quandaries duo: 1. Why do you think bitcoin is going to go supernova? 2. What is your exit strategy?

techguy1337

I'd happily buy the btc/eth etf in my retirement account like roth ira. No taxes. YES PLZ.

Jaythiest

If you don’t have any bitcoin at all then YES now is a good time to invest in BTC. If you already have a tiny bit of BTC then YES now is a good time to invest in BTc. If you already have a large amount of bitcoin then YES now is a good time to invest in BTC.

Structure-Efficient

Short answer - YES! And sell in 9 months.

fverdeja

YES!! Right when I'm about to get paid this month's salary.

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/180vjus/daily_crypto_discussion_november_22_2023_gmt0/).

HospitalNovel2635

Better grab your [MSTR](https://marketchameleon.com/Overview/MSTR/?lu=true&pap_aid=stormofnegativity&pap_cid=11111111) and strap in for the wild ride of the Opium Bird coin launch by YES. Don't miss out on the chance to join the revolution of fusing ERC1155 NFTs and ERC20 coins, and embrace your inner regarded finance guru. DYOR and get ready to fly high with Opium Bird, because this ain't your grandpa's JPEG.

Lord_emotabb

YES, make it illegal, therefore, unable to be taxed!! genius move!

benditbackwards

Short answer, YES. Long answer: DCAing will become SAVING, something people used to do a long time ago. Today, even people who believe have been orange pilled, still see Bitcoin as a risk on asset. You will eventually start to see Bitcoin as a Savings vehicle for your future ( a life raft if you will ) you start putting EVERYTHING extra you make into Bitcoin, after you have paid for food and shelter. As people starting looking at Bitcoin this way a world that runs on hard money will become a reality again. Politicians will have not choice to switch as the will of the people have spoken, the fiat ponzi scheme relies on people spending money on stupid frivolous things, they refer to this as the velocity of money, the more people save for the future by buying Bitcoin, that less valuable the fiat currency becomes, it will eventually dry up and die.

Spiritual_Art_7860

YES!!!

CointestMod

#Web3 Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 2nd place in the Web3 Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 2nd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Web 3: A failure in progress. > > ​ > > Web 3 promise of a fully decentralized web is an absurdity which won't take off for a very long time. I'm going to tackle a few simple points which explain why Web 3 is a ridiculous concept. > > ​ > > # Introduction: What the ???? is Web 3 > > According to wikipedia: > > >Web3 (also known as Web 3.0\[1\]\[2\]\[3\]) is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web which incorporates concepts such as decentralization, blockchain technologies, and token-based economics.\[4\] Some technologists and journalists have contrasted it with Web 2.0, wherein they say data and content are centralized in a small group of companies sometimes referred to as "Big Tech".\[5\] The term "Web3" was coined in 2014 by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood, and the idea gained interest in 2021 from cryptocurrency enthusiasts, large technology companies, and venture capital firms.\[5\]\[6\] > > > >Some commentators argue that Web3 will provide increased data security, scalability, and privacy for users and combat the influence of large technology companies.\[7\] They also raise concerns about the decentralized web component of Web3, citing the potential for low moderation and the proliferation of harmful content.\[7\] Some have expressed concerns over the centralization of wealth to a small group of investors and individuals,\[8\] or a loss of privacy due to more expansive data collection.\[9\] Others, such as Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey, have argued that Web3 only serves as a buzzword or marketing term.\[10\]\[11\]\[12\] > > [Web 3 Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3) > > ​ > > So from here we can see that Web3 is understood as different concepts which are all more absurd than the other. In this small essay I'm going to explain why a fully blockchain internet is bad, why token-based economics is bad for users, why lack of centralized authorities makes it bad for everyone. Of course there is a place for blockchain based applications in the worldwide web. But acting as if Web3 was the next iteration of online interaction just as Web2 was is an utter absurdity as will be shown in the conclusion by leveraging all the arguments I will deploy. > > ​ > > # Blockchain internet: Imutability or privacy = wtf > > ​ > > The problem of a blockchain internet is twofold. First one is imutability, which means that nothing can be deleted. YES right now we should still think that nothing is really deleted when we post something on the internet BUT the imutability of blockchain means that any records tied to our real identity would be there forever. > > The second aspect is that any privacy layered part of the internet would obviously descend into a fully 4chan degeneracy. I don't see how this is an improvment for any of us. Moderation and rules are, after all, why this cointest works for example. > > ​ > > Also I'm not even sure that national agencies or the European Union would accept that private companies could hold data related to your accounts which aren't destroyable. > > Blockchain integration is neat when it is not a concept used for data. For example, the blockchain integration on reddit for NFT avatars or funny stuff like moons is neat. But the vision of Web3 advanced by advocates is not this one. > > ​ > > # Token-based economics: Pay For Play ? > > One of the big ideas for Web3 that was popping off recently was the Dogecoin twitter in which people would have to pay gas fees to post tweets. So the more people are using doge the most valuable it becomes. Which means that Twitter would become more and more expensive. The sheer exclusion of 3rd world users is insane. Token-based economics integrated for every interaction is not the way forward. > > # You hated skipping ads, you'll love smart contracts pop-ups for everything. > > Now we hate having to do multiple clicks when only one would be optimal. Now imagine posting something online and having to wait for a smart contract to show up and sign it. If you can see how obnoxious that would be, then you know that Web3 is not going to replace Web 2 Anytime soon. > > ​ > > # Centralization means rules and moderation. > > Having a centralized web means that there are rules coming from the top. If the rules become obnoxious, then a competitor can create a plateform to try to catch the users searching for a better plateform. Of course, there is no interoperability in the current web so migrating your account can mean losing access to your old data videos and history, which in turns makes user reluctant to shop for new plateforms. But the lack of moderation and terms of services would not solve this in anyway. We all know that there are people of all ages and very immature people of all ages online. Rules makes this shared place viable. > > Decentralizing rules and a lack of content moderation is nothing to strive for in our day and age. > > # Conclusion: Like electricity or language, the web is searching the path of least resistance. > > Web 2 showed that users are always looking for the path of least resistance, which means minimal effort. In language we strive for simplification. Over a long period of time language gets simplified because it makes us using less brain power and muscle power to convey meaning. Web2 through plateforms, rendered obsolete the need for everyone to have and manage their own website. In exchange big plateforms made billions. Without the cripsy sleekness and simpleness of web2, a new concept for the worldwide web is dead on arrival. > > This is the simple truth, web2 is easy to use, web3 is complicated mess with tons of problems. > > Blockchains have real utility but people need to stop reinventing the wheel and start investing in cool uses. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/z9o1nt/general_concepts_web3_conarguments_december_2022/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive##wiki_web3) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17yjvc8/daily_crypto_discussion_november_19_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17xt27e/daily_crypto_discussion_november_18_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17x1j7o/daily_crypto_discussion_november_17_2023_gmt0/).

daytrader24365

YES

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17w8541/daily_crypto_discussion_november_16_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17vg9js/daily_crypto_discussion_november_15_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Web3 Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 2nd place in the Web3 Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 2nd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Web 3: A failure in progress. > > ​ > > Web 3 promise of a fully decentralized web is an absurdity which won't take off for a very long time. I'm going to tackle a few simple points which explain why Web 3 is a ridiculous concept. > > ​ > > # Introduction: What the ???? is Web 3 > > According to wikipedia: > > >Web3 (also known as Web 3.0\[1\]\[2\]\[3\]) is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web which incorporates concepts such as decentralization, blockchain technologies, and token-based economics.\[4\] Some technologists and journalists have contrasted it with Web 2.0, wherein they say data and content are centralized in a small group of companies sometimes referred to as "Big Tech".\[5\] The term "Web3" was coined in 2014 by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood, and the idea gained interest in 2021 from cryptocurrency enthusiasts, large technology companies, and venture capital firms.\[5\]\[6\] > > > >Some commentators argue that Web3 will provide increased data security, scalability, and privacy for users and combat the influence of large technology companies.\[7\] They also raise concerns about the decentralized web component of Web3, citing the potential for low moderation and the proliferation of harmful content.\[7\] Some have expressed concerns over the centralization of wealth to a small group of investors and individuals,\[8\] or a loss of privacy due to more expansive data collection.\[9\] Others, such as Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey, have argued that Web3 only serves as a buzzword or marketing term.\[10\]\[11\]\[12\] > > [Web 3 Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3) > > ​ > > So from here we can see that Web3 is understood as different concepts which are all more absurd than the other. In this small essay I'm going to explain why a fully blockchain internet is bad, why token-based economics is bad for users, why lack of centralized authorities makes it bad for everyone. Of course there is a place for blockchain based applications in the worldwide web. But acting as if Web3 was the next iteration of online interaction just as Web2 was is an utter absurdity as will be shown in the conclusion by leveraging all the arguments I will deploy. > > ​ > > # Blockchain internet: Imutability or privacy = wtf > > ​ > > The problem of a blockchain internet is twofold. First one is imutability, which means that nothing can be deleted. YES right now we should still think that nothing is really deleted when we post something on the internet BUT the imutability of blockchain means that any records tied to our real identity would be there forever. > > The second aspect is that any privacy layered part of the internet would obviously descend into a fully 4chan degeneracy. I don't see how this is an improvment for any of us. Moderation and rules are, after all, why this cointest works for example. > > ​ > > Also I'm not even sure that national agencies or the European Union would accept that private companies could hold data related to your accounts which aren't destroyable. > > Blockchain integration is neat when it is not a concept used for data. For example, the blockchain integration on reddit for NFT avatars or funny stuff like moons is neat. But the vision of Web3 advanced by advocates is not this one. > > ​ > > # Token-based economics: Pay For Play ? > > One of the big ideas for Web3 that was popping off recently was the Dogecoin twitter in which people would have to pay gas fees to post tweets. So the more people are using doge the most valuable it becomes. Which means that Twitter would become more and more expensive. The sheer exclusion of 3rd world users is insane. Token-based economics integrated for every interaction is not the way forward. > > # You hated skipping ads, you'll love smart contracts pop-ups for everything. > > Now we hate having to do multiple clicks when only one would be optimal. Now imagine posting something online and having to wait for a smart contract to show up and sign it. If you can see how obnoxious that would be, then you know that Web3 is not going to replace Web 2 Anytime soon. > > ​ > > # Centralization means rules and moderation. > > Having a centralized web means that there are rules coming from the top. If the rules become obnoxious, then a competitor can create a plateform to try to catch the users searching for a better plateform. Of course, there is no interoperability in the current web so migrating your account can mean losing access to your old data videos and history, which in turns makes user reluctant to shop for new plateforms. But the lack of moderation and terms of services would not solve this in anyway. We all know that there are people of all ages and very immature people of all ages online. Rules makes this shared place viable. > > Decentralizing rules and a lack of content moderation is nothing to strive for in our day and age. > > # Conclusion: Like electricity or language, the web is searching the path of least resistance. > > Web 2 showed that users are always looking for the path of least resistance, which means minimal effort. In language we strive for simplification. Over a long period of time language gets simplified because it makes us using less brain power and muscle power to convey meaning. Web2 through plateforms, rendered obsolete the need for everyone to have and manage their own website. In exchange big plateforms made billions. Without the cripsy sleekness and simpleness of web2, a new concept for the worldwide web is dead on arrival. > > This is the simple truth, web2 is easy to use, web3 is complicated mess with tons of problems. > > Blockchains have real utility but people need to stop reinventing the wheel and start investing in cool uses. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/z9o1nt/general_concepts_web3_conarguments_december_2022/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive##wiki_web3) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17vg9js/daily_crypto_discussion_november_15_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17vg9js/daily_crypto_discussion_november_15_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17uoy99/daily_crypto_discussion_november_14_2023_gmt0/).

spartikle

YES!

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17txo83/daily_crypto_discussion_november_13_2023_gmt0/).

Noematasv

YES! Pass it already, there are many great projects

pigeonwiggle

if Visa charges small businesses 1.50 per transaction, and it's small transactions? i could see small businesses maybe adopting bitcoin. but imagine going to buy a car with bitcoin - you have to both look at the price of bitcoin together and they're like, "this is great, 1.3 bitcoin for the car." and so you're in the middle of signing paperwork, and you check your phone to see bitcoin drop 20% in value... YES! - oh, the retailer saw it too, oh they don't want to go through with the sale until the update to 1.6 bitcoin. ...ooh, are you willing to buy it at 1.6? so you do, fuck it. finally the numbers all math and the transaction is closed and you drive home and use your new car for 2 days before seeing bitcoin has gone up 30%... fuck. i think it will be awhile before people use bitcoin the way they use "cash" (or credit) visa tapping is the quickest, easiest mode of paying ever.

CointestMod

#Web3 Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 2nd place in the Web3 Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 2nd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Web 3: A failure in progress. > > ​ > > Web 3 promise of a fully decentralized web is an absurdity which won't take off for a very long time. I'm going to tackle a few simple points which explain why Web 3 is a ridiculous concept. > > ​ > > # Introduction: What the ???? is Web 3 > > According to wikipedia: > > >Web3 (also known as Web 3.0\[1\]\[2\]\[3\]) is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web which incorporates concepts such as decentralization, blockchain technologies, and token-based economics.\[4\] Some technologists and journalists have contrasted it with Web 2.0, wherein they say data and content are centralized in a small group of companies sometimes referred to as "Big Tech".\[5\] The term "Web3" was coined in 2014 by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood, and the idea gained interest in 2021 from cryptocurrency enthusiasts, large technology companies, and venture capital firms.\[5\]\[6\] > > > >Some commentators argue that Web3 will provide increased data security, scalability, and privacy for users and combat the influence of large technology companies.\[7\] They also raise concerns about the decentralized web component of Web3, citing the potential for low moderation and the proliferation of harmful content.\[7\] Some have expressed concerns over the centralization of wealth to a small group of investors and individuals,\[8\] or a loss of privacy due to more expansive data collection.\[9\] Others, such as Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey, have argued that Web3 only serves as a buzzword or marketing term.\[10\]\[11\]\[12\] > > [Web 3 Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3) > > ​ > > So from here we can see that Web3 is understood as different concepts which are all more absurd than the other. In this small essay I'm going to explain why a fully blockchain internet is bad, why token-based economics is bad for users, why lack of centralized authorities makes it bad for everyone. Of course there is a place for blockchain based applications in the worldwide web. But acting as if Web3 was the next iteration of online interaction just as Web2 was is an utter absurdity as will be shown in the conclusion by leveraging all the arguments I will deploy. > > ​ > > # Blockchain internet: Imutability or privacy = wtf > > ​ > > The problem of a blockchain internet is twofold. First one is imutability, which means that nothing can be deleted. YES right now we should still think that nothing is really deleted when we post something on the internet BUT the imutability of blockchain means that any records tied to our real identity would be there forever. > > The second aspect is that any privacy layered part of the internet would obviously descend into a fully 4chan degeneracy. I don't see how this is an improvment for any of us. Moderation and rules are, after all, why this cointest works for example. > > ​ > > Also I'm not even sure that national agencies or the European Union would accept that private companies could hold data related to your accounts which aren't destroyable. > > Blockchain integration is neat when it is not a concept used for data. For example, the blockchain integration on reddit for NFT avatars or funny stuff like moons is neat. But the vision of Web3 advanced by advocates is not this one. > > ​ > > # Token-based economics: Pay For Play ? > > One of the big ideas for Web3 that was popping off recently was the Dogecoin twitter in which people would have to pay gas fees to post tweets. So the more people are using doge the most valuable it becomes. Which means that Twitter would become more and more expensive. The sheer exclusion of 3rd world users is insane. Token-based economics integrated for every interaction is not the way forward. > > # You hated skipping ads, you'll love smart contracts pop-ups for everything. > > Now we hate having to do multiple clicks when only one would be optimal. Now imagine posting something online and having to wait for a smart contract to show up and sign it. If you can see how obnoxious that would be, then you know that Web3 is not going to replace Web 2 Anytime soon. > > ​ > > # Centralization means rules and moderation. > > Having a centralized web means that there are rules coming from the top. If the rules become obnoxious, then a competitor can create a plateform to try to catch the users searching for a better plateform. Of course, there is no interoperability in the current web so migrating your account can mean losing access to your old data videos and history, which in turns makes user reluctant to shop for new plateforms. But the lack of moderation and terms of services would not solve this in anyway. We all know that there are people of all ages and very immature people of all ages online. Rules makes this shared place viable. > > Decentralizing rules and a lack of content moderation is nothing to strive for in our day and age. > > # Conclusion: Like electricity or language, the web is searching the path of least resistance. > > Web 2 showed that users are always looking for the path of least resistance, which means minimal effort. In language we strive for simplification. Over a long period of time language gets simplified because it makes us using less brain power and muscle power to convey meaning. Web2 through plateforms, rendered obsolete the need for everyone to have and manage their own website. In exchange big plateforms made billions. Without the cripsy sleekness and simpleness of web2, a new concept for the worldwide web is dead on arrival. > > This is the simple truth, web2 is easy to use, web3 is complicated mess with tons of problems. > > Blockchains have real utility but people need to stop reinventing the wheel and start investing in cool uses. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/z9o1nt/general_concepts_web3_conarguments_december_2022/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive##wiki_web3) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17t7on0/daily_crypto_discussion_november_12_2023_gmt0/).

daytrader24365

YES

Accomplished-One-110

YES

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17rqxsp/daily_crypto_discussion_november_10_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17q8ie2/daily_crypto_discussion_november_8_2023_gmt0/).

WineMakerBg

"and have a decent chunk of savings" Did you ask anyone for advice on how to do that? YES: proceed with following advice NO: no need to ask internet strangers for financial advice

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17q8ie2/daily_crypto_discussion_november_8_2023_gmt0/).

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17opmuy/daily_crypto_discussion_november_6_2023_gmt0/).

samsquantchtpb1

Yes. YES.

5DollarsInTheWoods

Is all your BTC off exchange? Do you have two cold wallets or at least a cold that's never connected AND a hot wallet for trading? Do you have a dedicated crypto computer that's never been used for surfing? If you can answer yes to all these and are willing to further research how to protect your BTC, then absolutely, YES, you should top off to one BTC! Then you should up it to five! Never sell. Come back in five years and enjoy your status as one of the elite.

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Con-Arguments Below is an argument written by Nostalg33k which won 3rd place in the Bitcoin Con-Arguments topic for a prior [Cointest](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_policy) round. If this topic is active, submit an entry in r/CointestOfficial and earn Moons if you win. Moon prizes are: 3rd - 600, 2nd - 300, 3rd - 150, and Best Analysis - 500. > # Bitcoin, could it be wrong. "Are we the bad guys ?" > > ​ > > In this small write up, I am going to delve into con-arguments against Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the flagship of cryptocurrencies but there are a lot of criticism that could be leveraged against Bitcoin. First of all, let's delve into a small presentation of Bitcoin. > > # Bitcoin: An introduction. > > Bitcoin is the biggst cryptocurrency. It was created by a mysterious figure. The creation of Bitcoin is a strange and mysterious mystery. No one knows who created Bitcoin. > > Bitcoin was started as a way to circumvent traditional banking. Bitcoin relies on blockchain technology. Blockchain can be seen as an open book allowing anyone to know where is each fraction of Bitcoin ever. > > This blockchain is maintained through computer power. In a vulgar way: Bitcoin is mined by solving math problems. The maths problem becomes harder when more people are mining so that mining takes a fixed amount of time according to a timeline known to everyone. In order to respect this timeline, mining rewards are halved every few years. > > Since anyone who wants to validate transactions is forced to complete a very hard math problem (which becomes harder the more people are mining), no one can cheat in new transactions. Also, every other miner has a copy of the blockchain. Through making sure that no entity has 50% of the mining, you can stop nefarious actors from changing the blockchain. > > This is using cryptographic technology that I don't yet understand but you can read more about it here: > > Bitcoin Wikipedia > > Without delving more into the tech side of bitcoin. Which can also be explained through youtube videos here: Bitcoin explained > > The Metrics of Bitcoin are currently: 22400$ Per coin for a Market cap of 430 Bilions and a daily volume of 19 Billions. Bitcoin was shortly valued at 69000 usd during the ATH. > > Now let's dive into what is making Bitcoin so bad. > > # Permissionless: A senseless destruction of world order. > > Bitcoin is a project existing in a very delicate world balanced by power structure. While we can be happy that the current top dog is the US (yes they are not perfect BUT they could be worse) we know that someone else could be on top. Despite that, we should strive to use the current US dominance to curb rogue states into the world order. > > The current war in Ukraine is a demonstration of the world order crumbling to maintain itself. I'd argue, the rise of cryptocurrencies may be a part of this crumbling. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, Bitcoin replacing the US Dollar would usher a chaotic age of international relation. > > The world has shrank a lot since the rise of internet. The fact is that the stability of the world is much more precious than ever. Everyone can see what happens in any other country and how the supply chains which guarantee our comfort are of the utmost importance. YET, we are pushing forward a great disrupter of balance. > > Permissionless can help terrorists, permissionless can help crime. YES traditionnal banking is doing it already BUT I'd argue that the absence of regulator and watchdog to make the current system comply is not an argument in favor of a tech which will make regulation and surveillance harder. > > # Bitcoin: This MONEY Doesn't Work, This Money Doesn't WORK. > > Bitcoin is claiming to be a currency. A viable alternative to fiat money. But anyone with a neuron or two could realize that the fluctuation in the value of Bitcoin is crazy. Some pedentic nerd and bitcoin maximalist could argue that 1 BTC = 1 BTC BUT if you don't know how much you'll need to put food on the table then BTC is not working as a currency. Yes inflation is lowering the value of Fiat BUT fiat doesn't see wild swings of + or - 30 % in most economies. > > While not being really MONEY I'd argue that Bitcoin doesn't WORK. To work the economy needs money to move. 100$ could buy groceries then be used to pay the local brewery, the butcher and many more people before going back to a bank account. This movement has created economic vitality. Bitcoin, most of the time, is seen as an investment vehicle such as gold. I'd argue that these vehicle are not valuable for society since the freeze money in place. > > In a bank, your money is working. Instead of Bitcoin, people should be paid more by banks to put their money in investment portfolios since these provide the liquidity necessary to make the economy work. > > ​ > > # Bitcoin: A very big spending of energy. > > ​ > > Bitcoin is a project which is wasting a lot of ressource for something which is not making a lot of sense. While Bitcoin is using more and more green energy, I'd argue that it is still a big waste. Subsidies could prop up the green sector far better than the mining farms that go with windfarms. > > Seeing Bitcoin as one of the biggest leverage of the green sector is a non-sense. Optimization of the energy sector means that the variable production should allow to reduce the use of fossil energy. Not allow to waste energy in a senseless project. > > ​ > > # Conclusion: The harsh truth is, we may be the bad guys. > > Partaking in an economic sector which allows for a disruption of world order, which doesn't help the economy and which is wasting energy may not be beneficial. This is why Bitcoin should not be seen as a messiah of economic proportion but as something which should raise criticism and should be heavily regulated. > > Good luck in your investments. ***** Would you like to learn more? [Click here](/r/CointestOfficial/comments/100p7u8/top_coins_bitcoin_conarguments_january_2023/) to be taken to the original topic-thread for this argument or you can scan through the [Cointest Archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin) to find arguments on this topic in other rounds. Pros and cons per topic will likely change for every new post. Since this is a con-argument, what could be a better time to promote the Skeptics Discussion thread? You can find the latest thread [here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/17opmuy/daily_crypto_discussion_november_6_2023_gmt0/).