pull down to refresh
you are not interested in hyperbitcoinization?
False dichotomy.
I can be interested in hyperbitcoinization and not in your token.
no you can't. please kindly re-read my post and think.
Another fallacious response. Go argue with a wall. Mute.
your inability to point out where my logic is fallacious and your lil effort to mute me are sadly hilarious. not that much better than an average fiat banker.
you will buy nah•sovereign•diamond at the price you deserve, and i say this with love. sorry for being straight forward but the math is so clear that you gotta be stupid to not see that without nah•sovereign•diamond there will be no hyperbitcoinization.
I am not the person you were replying to here, but I will respond to your challenge of pointing out where your logic is fallacious:
Offering a new token is something that only scammers do. There is no reason to introduce a crypto token to the world if you already have a good idea which can change the world.
Every "utility" token ever created would be better implemented using an SQL database. The only reason people use tokens instead is because they know they can get idiots to buy them, temporarily, before their inevitable crash.
You can do everything you claim to be doing in your original post WITHOUT introducing a new token. The token solves nothing at all, except a way for you to gather more capital to yourself. Sure, you might be doing great things with that capital. Your heart may be in the right place with your mission. But your method of raising capital is not ethical or necessary in order to accomplish your stated goals.
nah is not an "utility token". it's a rune, meaning it is native on the bitcoin timechain.
saying nah is an "utility token" is like saying sat is an "utility token". sat & nah exist because bitcoin itself is not enough. the bitcoin timechain has a unit bias problem and Satoshi Nakamoto struggled to solve it, as shown in the quote at the top of my post. this is just basic knowledge that every bitcoin OG should already know.
in the post, i have provided you with detailed math why sat alone cannot solve the unit bias problem. please kindly read it carefully and verify the math for yourself.
therefore, the bitcoin standard will have to eventually become the satnah standard, otherwise the bitcoin timechain can't be adopted, due to the unit bias problem.
please get your facts straight before you go and try to sound smart.
Get my facts straight? I never claimed "nah" was a utility token. I was using "utility" tokens as an example for why ANY new crypto token is not necessary. And I didn't really get into any details, because it is a long discussion to explain why Bitcoin is enough, and anything else is unnecessary. I was trying to be as brief as possible.
Sats ARE Bitcoin. They aren't some layer on top of Bitcoin that exists because of Bitcoin. They literally ARE Bitcoin.
You are making a million assumptions in your silly "math". Bitcoin does not have a unit bias problem, and the Satoshi quote DOES NOT prove that it does. It only explains why he chose the units he chose at the time.
The price of things will mold to fit the inherent scarcity of Bitcoin (Sats). The reason it appears to have a unit bias problem now is because:
WE HAVE HAD ZERO PRICE DISCOVERY HAPPENING USING BITCOIN AS THE BASE LAYER MONEY.
This is why I'm so negative toward the Bitcoin community. Instead of focusing on fiat macro numbers and NGU, they should be spending their energy on build real circular Bitcoin economies whereby we can START to have price discovery happen.
Currently, there is zero price discovery happening. Instead, we anchor to the fiat values, which we all know are arbitrary and unethical at their core. I cannot understand why more people aren't working harder to facilitate true Bitcoin price discovery for goods and services. This is the real problem Bitcoin has for adoption. Which is to say, it's a problem of will. The current Bitcoiners don't have enough will power or virtue to switch to a more ethical system and endure the short term pain that will come from it.
So, ultimately, I very much object to your claims that Bitcoin has a unit bias problem. Instead, it has a fiat-brained problem. Too much fiat minded individuals holding Bitcoin who aren't using Bitcoin in such a manner to allow the perceived unit-bias to alleviate itself naturally.
a) implying the only possible path to hyperbitcoinization being via your token is absurd and scammy.
b) when I point out that a) is a false dichotomy your retort is to double down on the false dichotomy and tell me I am not thinking.
You aren’t a serious person. I have no reason to waste my time debating with you.
no, you clearly did not read the post and totally misunderstood me.
i said, the only possible path to immediate hyperbitcoinization is the combination of sat & nah, with the nah being the primary unit of account of the bitcoin timechain. sat continues to be the secondary unit of account, since you need sat to pay bitcoin miners to move nah.
it's like back in the day the dual asset standard was gold as the primary unit and silver as the secondary unit. but this time the dual assets are nah•sovereign•diamond & sat-digital-gold. nah is native to the bitcoin timechain, is a better unit of account, and is actually rarer and harder than sat. you just have verify the math for yourself.
the only other path is one where you will have to wait for another ~45 years for global m2 to inflate above $2 quadrillion to match with 2 quadrillion sats, while losing momentum and risking the collapse of society due to fiat debasement, to have another chance at hyperbitcoinization.
and i sure as hell am not waiting. i need hyperbitcoinization, right now. i work on this dual asset standard because i honestly don't see any better path.
You are full of shit.
Fuck off.
and you are just sad. i mean sat, digital gold, lmao.
satnah is honestly a better brand name for bitcoin compared to just sat.
shitcoin parrot.
I am not interested.