Jack Dorsey on #bitcoin: “It becomes irrelevant if it's only a store of value and not used for everyday payments.”

I’m a software engineer. Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) have little to no technological value as-is. It’s not as revolutionary or innovative as many claim: It doesn’t solve any major problems that traditional software can’t solve. The crypto projects that popped up in recent years are all solving problems they create themselves or solving problems that traditional software could also solve just fine, if not better. (i.e. underserved markets, unbanked, etc.). It has immutable records on a blockchain ledger, but that’s just something everyone not in Supply Chain Management claims can be used in Supply Chain Management. Blockchain is just a data structure like many others used in software development and doesn’t provide any real innovation in and of itself. It can verify that an entity owns something, but what actual value does that provide over current validations? Many of the Bitcoin/crypto evangelists don't work in technical disciplines, I don't think that's a coincidence. There are a few niche use cases where crypto is better suited but it’s uncommon. From a business perspective, what does it actually solve? Unusable for regular governments, businesses, and individuals: Scalability issues, lack of government regulation, high transaction costs, high environmental impact, technological limitations of Bitcoin, and intense volatility make Bitcoin unusable for business transactions or for businesses to keep it on their balance sheet for long. This means unless extreme, major changes come to the network, it will remain unusable for most people. For these reasons, it will not replace the USD without a major overhaul. The USD has the backing of the most powerful economy, technology, and military backing it. Even if the US lost 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place, no other reserve currency economy would ever adopt a currency that they couldn’t control. It has no intrinsic value: Many claim fiat is a Ponzi scheme, which is categorically false if you know what a Ponzi scheme is. There are many problems with the fiat system, no doubt, but I digress. The returns in Bitcoin are not generated by an increase in adoption, utility as a currency, new value creation, new products, productivity increases, business use cases, or anything else EXCEPT that more people are buying in. People often attempt to make the same claim for gold, real estate, or stocks, where those who got in first get paid by those who got in last, but those represent underlying REAL assets. There is true, real, physical collateral that backs those asset classes. Bitcoin, however, has no intrinsic value; it cannot be modeled because it doesn’t do anything. You can live in a house, but not in a Bitcoin wallet. At the end of the day, it’s just a digital version of gold now. If you want scarcity, a physical commodity would be better as you can’t fabricate more out of thin air, but you can digitally. Security concerns, fraud, and illicit activities: Hacking and social engineering are extremely prevalent in this community. Exchanges and wallets are frequent targets for hackers as cryptocurrencies protect them from being pursued technologically (even this is going away with today’s traditional software tracing tech). The only people I have ever met who have ever transacted in Bitcoin were using it for drug purchases. Outside of being traded by speculators or people searching for a store of value, it is used for illicit activities. Decentralization: If the main thesis of cryptocurrency is to be anti-government, why wouldn’t the government just ban it outright? They are heavily incentivized to stamp it out, and they are fully capable of doing so today and for the foreseeable future. While I think the idea of decentralizing away from governments is generally good, there are many flaws to say that this is a finalized solution for the problem: - If the US government banned ownership and transactions of all cryptocurrencies (including Bitcoin) tomorrow, the price would drop 99%. Seems like a bad solution if it can be wiped out overnight by one government. It would have truly zero use outside of illicit behavior. - A centralized or coordinated group can obtain undue, arbitrary unregulated, and undisputed power over the system - A 51% network attack by a centralized or coordinated authority can disrupt the entire system - Sybil attacks disrupt the network - Decentralization causes immense scalability problems ... the list goes on. Centralization does have some benefits like liability placement, reversible transactions, governance, and many business/regulatory uses that protect consumers. It’s not a random coincidence that we have centralization in our lives, it’s intentional. Too much? Yes. The solution to providing the most value to people is that the balance lies between complete centralization and decentralization. There is a reason there is no truly democratized, decentralized business model, it does not work. Same goes for direct democracy. What is Bitcoin good for, then? It is a risk asset and potentially a store of value, but that’s it. It is extremely volatile, has no business case or adoption, could be banned instantly, has little to no technological value, can be stolen fairly easily, and has zero intrinsic value. Overcomplicated, overengineered. That said, it is good for diversification purposes, similar to gold. It is essentially digital gold. Nothing more, nothing less. There is also a case to be made that the technology is improving over time, though as innovative as people claim, it moves significantly slower than a startup with one-thousandth the market cap of Bitcoin. I’m buying roughly $2000 a year in Bitcoin going forward to diversify and potentially achieve higher returns than other assets, but it comes with a much higher risk, so I’m keeping it ~1-3% of my net worth over time. If you found this post valuable, please: - Drop a follow @TheTrueFIREGuy - Retweet so others can learn why Bitcoin isn’t as revolutionary as people claim or teach me why it is - Prove me wrong without just saying "study more"

I am 26 years old and I can’t wait to tell my grandkids that I never purchased a meaningful amount of #Bitcoin

How do Bitcoin Maxis find the time to hate on Ordinals. I guess they find this fulfilling in life.

I would simply rather own the SP500 $SPY for the next 10 years than #Bitcoin

If you make a NFT of a real diamond, and the diamond itself gets destroyed in a fire tomorrow, you still have the same asset. Because the token still exists and is in limited supply just as before. Nothing has changed. What NFT is doing to the concept of asset, few understand.

Most people buying Bitcoin are doing it wrong!

This is something the markets have been calling for, and now even more people have access to crypto through convenient and highly regulated products. 3/3