What's something bitcoiners do that HURTS adoption more than it helps? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

What's something bitcoiners do that HURTS adoption more than it helps?

2873 sats \ 66 comments \ @birdeye21 25 Jul 2023 bitcoin

"Get rid of the "hodl" narrative. You will never convince billions of people of the utility of something by telling them to buy this thing and keep it locked in a safe (and for how long?)"

@phygit said from my previous post, making me think of this question.

I can definitely see where shouting "hodl" at newcomers isn't going to help translate the benefits of bitcoin as a currency. Sure, maybe HODLing works for savings, but if we want Bitcoin at the center of our monetary system, it takes more than just holding.

SPEND & REPLACE is what we need to be shouting in the fiat + bitcoin convoluted world we currently live in, imo.

What else are bitcoiners doing that could be harming adoption, more than helping?

view all related items

670 sats \ 4 replies \ @nerd2ninja 25 Jul 2023

Talking about fucking conspiracies XD. Dude, I will be spitting just straight true facts, but because it makes the government sound bad, its perceived as conspiratorial. I gotta chill and be matter of fact with it.

150 sats \ 2 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 25 Jul 2023

illogically, social perception is more relevant to "truth" than actual fact nowadays

We have to change Bitcoin's perception. No amount of finger pointing at the govt makes a difference, everyone does that already.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @nerd2ninja 25 Jul 2023

Exactly. You know the game. Perception is Reality

221 sats \ 0 replies \ @sudonaka 28 Jul 2023

No thanks fed

50 sats \ 0 replies \ @rijndael 26 Jul 2023

this

306 sats \ 0 replies \ @bagel 25 Jul 2023

We are so forward looking we forget to see the here and now. At least I do.

154 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 25 Jul 2023

Just generally being perceived as fringe cultlike weirdos.

The best persuasion starts with admiration. Being someone people like who happens to believe in Bitcoin will do more for adoption than good arguments.

42 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 25 Jul 2023

While true, I'd also argue that social perception is as much an effect as it is a cause.

If bitcoin price is going up and adoption increasing, all of a sudden these "fringe, cultlike weirdos" become "eccentric visionaries."

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 26 Jul 2023

Fair, but there's not as much each of us can do about that.

72 sats \ 6 replies \ @grayruby 25 Jul 2023

I like spend and replace but I think hodl is still a strong narrative. When people get skin in the game they start to learn. I think hodl is first step, then spend and replace.

I think there is a pretty funny meme about this but we are all so passionate about bitcoin we want to tell every new person we are trying to orange pill everything we find amazing about bitcoin. If you are 3 minutes into a conversation with someone and you are singing the praises of the difficulty adjustment they are definitely going to say this is confusing as fuck no way I am buying that shit. haha

32 sats \ 2 replies \ @SimpleStacker 25 Jul 2023

People need to skill up in talking about bitcoin, for sure. I really don't think difficulty adjustment needs to be a part of any convo unless specifically asked about, lol.

8 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 25 Jul 2023

That was just one example. I just think we need to offer a few key talking points. -Digital network like the internet that works all around the world -Permissionless- anyone can join -Peer to peer/No trusted third party- don't need to trust a bank actually has your money -Fixed supply asset- government and central bank can't just print more -Self custody- be your own bank if you want (of course mention this is highly recommended)

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 25 Jul 2023

we need more children's books in Bitcoin

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 25 Jul 2023

i've made that mistake a few too many times lol

42 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 25 Jul 2023

We all have. I made my wife watch this hour long documentary on bitcoin years ago and it explained the specifics of how the blockchain works, mining and so on. It wasn't super technical but it was a lot of information. She wasn't receptive at all, pretty much thought it was like a tech stock to bet on that uses too much energy. Then one day she was telling me about her friend having trouble sending money across the world and it taking 5 days to settle and costing 150 bucks to send 2000 or something like that and I said why didn't they just use bitcoin and I explained how that would work and the lightbulb went off. I said you know this is very valuable to people trying to send remittances back to their home countries who are waiting days and paying exorbitant rates. This one use case started to change her mind about bitcoin and over the years she hasn't turned into full laser eyed maxi but she is more pro bitcoin than negative and owns it now and saves a bit in it every month.

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 25 Jul 2023

I'm a firm believer that if BTC truly is a universal technology, then there really is a use case or advantage or something that anyone around the world can find valuable. It's not just some niche. But it can be more difficult for some than others to figure out what it is they need to hear for the lightbulb to go off.

92 sats \ 6 replies \ @CoSatoshi 25 Jul 2023

Moving a newbie straight into self custody. They're likely to get turned off, they definitely don't understand, and therefore they're at risk of screwing it up. The transition needs to be more slow, and it needs to be very well understood before self-custody occurs. Essentially, they have to at least be on the path towards orange-pill before self-custody. If they don't yet understand the dangers of fiat, they'll have no clue as to the importance and responsibility of self-custody.

11 sats \ 5 replies \ @clr 25 Jul 2023

If they don't understand the dangers of fiat, there is absolutely zero reason why they would need or want bitcoin (except maybe hoping to get rich quick, which is the wrong reason). If they get turned off so easily, they don't need bitcoin. Better spend your efforts with somebody else.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @CoSatoshi 25 Jul 2023

No, sure there is. For example, they may be under the mainstream propaganda that Bitcoin is slow and can't scale as a payment merchant for microtransactions. Getting them started on a custody wallet like WoS or Strike can immediately dispel that myth, thus opening them up to further learn about Bitcoin; creating curiosity.

Additionally it can allow them the opportunity to see the value of even a modicum of holdings (say $50's worth) increase in value; further driving the incentive to learn more and maybe hold more in the near future.

And for that reason, additionally, it establishes a connection between you and them, allowing you to operate as the point person to assist and guide them along their path. That's probably the most valuable point here. They now essentially have a private bank teller with whom they can consult any time, any day, and when the time is right...

BAM!

Self-custody.

11 sats \ 3 replies \ @clr 26 Jul 2023

Have you had consistent and lasting success using 'microtransactions' as a selling point? How many of your targets are here on SN or on Nostr using zaps? Or do they use microtransactions for something else?

What happens when WoS is forced to KYC everybody before allowing withdrawals or they get hacked?

The reality is that there aren't still many decent self-custody Lightning wallets. Luckily, Phoenix, Mutiny and Zeus (among others) are working on it. In a way, the mainstream propaganda is right. Lightning isn't ready for the masses (but it's getting closer).

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @CoSatoshi 26 Jul 2023

All good points/questions.

To your first question, yes. I'd say about 3-2 success-fail. By contrast when I try and start someone on self-custody, it's 0. That's just my experience, but I think I know why as explained above. None of them are here of Nostr, however I'd be curious to see how a newbie fares going into Nostr/SN, etc...

The hacking is a legit concern. But again, small amounts only. I don't see it as very likely, at least not compared to an exchange getting hacked/rugged. Maybe I'm wrong there, idk.

But to the KYC point, privacy is not something the newbie is ready for either, IMO. And on WoS, it's just an email that's required if I'm not mistaken. I don't believe it's full KYC, right? Furthermore, I've withdrawn BTC before, no problem. If you attempt to sell BTC on there, it directs you to MoonPay.

For custody wallets, I personally like Muun. Super clear, clean, easy to use, and runs well on Android. The wallet backup is nice as well, and I like that you can use it before the backup process is completed (kick the tires, so to speak).

Long story short, my overall thesis is that it's a mistake to start newbies off with self-custody. They need to come to that understanding on there own. Therefore, it's much more effective to address specific objections in their minds (aka: meet them where they are). Show them it's fast, show them it's easy, show them it's already available. Be there for the long-term along their journey.

11 sats \ 1 reply \ @clr 26 Jul 2023

Thanks for sharing.

And on WoS, it's just an email that's required if I'm not mistaken. I don't believe it's full KYC, right?

For now. But the government of Australia or someone else could force them to start collecting KYC info, to comply with the travel rule, etc. The bigger WoS grows, the more likely it will be targeted by governments. WoS is being recommended not because it's ideal, but because currently self-custody lightning solutions suck mostly. That needs to change. If the average Joe cannot self-custody his sats, then Bitcoin's value proposition is mostly gone.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @CoSatoshi 26 Jul 2023

True, and good point. Hopefully they and other custody wallets can avoid it for as long as possible. We'll have to see what happens there.

Remember tho, it's not a dichotomy re: self-custody. It's not like you either do or don't. You can do both (and in fact, I do). The average Joe can start off on custody, learn a little here and there, and then witness the Canadian Trucker Rally (or other world-news event providing a CLEAR example why self-custody is important) and change their mind. At least in this scenario, they're primed.

62 sats \ 0 replies \ @runningbitcorn 25 Jul 2023

The North American contingent is really weird on the whole carnivore kick, for whatever reason. No one wants to hear the bro science on eating beef, dude.

31 sats \ 7 replies \ @proeu 25 Jul 2023

Lack of humility. Lack of generosity. Narrow world view. Explain most things using "us vs. them."

Need more women representation.

Need to create a welcoming place to ask questions and to learn

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @llamabyte 27 Jul 2023

Feminist bitcoin will kill bitcoin.

Bitcoin is neutral.

It doesn't need more women. It doesn't need less women.

It needs exactly the amount of men or women that need and can use it.

Does USD need more women representation ? Or gold? What a silly sentence.

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @proeu 31 Jul 2023

first, what

second, women representation is key when it comes to adoption but that may not be your priority

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @llamabyte 1 Aug 2023

Oh, i see, the topic was about adoption. lol, nvm. Yeah i see what you mean.

https://imgprxy.stacker.news/HvbVRee_19Ridk5jpxTabxCusIZ-EWe47CqBiK763pM/rs:fit:600:500:0/g:no/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWdwcm94eS5pcmlzLnRvL2luc2VjdXJlL3BsYWluL2h0dHBzOi8vY2RuLm5vc3RyLmJ1aWxkL2kvZmFjMmZkMGM5OGE5MmE1OTJkZTJiYjY2OTFmYjY4NmI4YjdjMTU0NDRhNjU2NWQzOTQ0NjkyODVhYWJiYjAwMi5qcGc

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @llamabyte 1 Aug 2023

sometimes i reply to stuff in my notifications not remembering what the initial topic was about.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @llamabyte 31 Jul 2023

If no women ever use bitcoin it won't change the usefulness or use case for bitcoin.

Bitcoin no more needs women representation then it needs any other conceivable category.

It's neutral.

I get it, you want more women in bitcoin, but it's like saying Gold needs more women. It doesn't make sense. Gold is Gold. If you are interested in Gold an its properties you will be interested in it.

Bitcoin is bitcoin, if you like and need what it has to offer you will adopt it regardless of gender, or any other factor.

If no women ever adopt bitcoin, it will still be the best money out there. Women need Bitcoin.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @proeu 31 Jul 2023

I get your argument. I'm arguing for representation that is public facing (i.e. media)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @llamabyte 31 Jul 2023

Let's think about this another way.

If all public representation of bitcoin was only women.

What benefit would be added to bitcoin ?

8 sats \ 1 reply \ @Fundamentals 26 Jul 2023

Framing Bitcoin as an investment is the worst possible thing people do for adoption. Drives me crazy.

People who don't save are in no position to be investing anything. The idea that you're creating productive capital with your "investment" is delusional and psychotic and you'll never actually save with that mindset.

You'll also get rekt by capital gains and getting rugged in good markets and by price action in bad markets.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 26 Jul 2023

Bitcoin as an "investment vehicle" is fiat. I want freedom money.

7 sats \ 0 replies \ @nicosey 26 Jul 2023

Make it a religion

7 sats \ 1 reply \ @Fundamentals 26 Jul 2023

Nobody who really understands bitcoin gives a shit about carnivores, conspiracies, and whatever other social piccadillos people think hurt adoption.

People adopt bitcoin because they see the value for themselves.

I think people have a distorted view of what adoption actually is.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 26 Jul 2023

and the timeline at which it should take place. The gradual part will probably last longer than we think, and the suddenly part will move much more quickly.

1 sat \ 10 replies \ @02ad8239c2 25 Jul 2023

meh - people come to Bitcoin by and for themselves - nothing you or i say or do matters to 'adoption' at all - it could potentially be a very long ride.

11 sats \ 4 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 25 Jul 2023

couldn't disagree more - everything you and i, and every other bitcoiner says and does matters for adoption

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @02ad8239c2 25 Jul 2023

that's vanity - everybody chooses for themselves

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @birdeye21 OP 25 Jul 2023

"vanity" is what scales -- not just waiting along for the ride

luckily there's probably enough people talking now for others to kick back, but that wasn't the case when this thing launched

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @02ad8239c2 25 Jul 2023

you're leading horses to water.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @legxxi 30 Jul 2023

deleted by author

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @legxxi 30 Jul 2023

When the student is ready, Bitcoin will arrive..

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @proeu 25 Jul 2023

Disagree. Compassionate persuasion can go a long way

1 sat \ 2 replies \ @02ad8239c2 25 Jul 2023

because you know what's best for others...

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @proeu 26 Jul 2023

whats best for others is a life of dignity <3

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @02ad8239c2 26 Jul 2023

it's for them to choose

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @cointastical 26 Jul 2023

Spend and replace? Do you want me to take my Fiat, to then pay a premium to buy Bitcoin, and then turn around and just spend those Bitcoin? If I'm an enthusiast yeah I'll do that maybe. But normies are not going to do that.

Now on the other hand, if I am earning in Bitcoin, it would be just as stupid to buy Fiat with my Bitcoin only to then spend that fiat, when I would otherwise already had the option to just spend in Bitcoin.

So it's not spend and replace that we should be pushing it should be dlfor ys to demand that we be paid in Bitcoin

If my boss knows that I need to be paid in Bitcoin as a condition of my continued employment then she's probably going to decide that her company should begin accepting Bitcoin so that they don't have to buy Bitcoin in order to then pay me in Bitcoin.

So earn in Bitcoin. That's the way to get a circular economy to happen to where I will use Bitcoin more, everyday. For everything.

25 sats \ 0 replies \ @birdeye21 OP 26 Jul 2023

Both work, but asking to be paid in bitcoin doesn't as directly convey its value as a currency however, imo. Spend & replace does.

buy a lot of bitcoin with fiat. Keep most in cold storage, a little bit in hot

live life

spend bitcoin from the hot wallet whenever you have the opportunity. Replace with fiat what you just spent

usher in abundance for the world

0 sats \ 13 replies \ @KoreaComK 25 Jul 2023

I don't see this as a bad thing for adoption. On the contrary, when we tell merchants to use bitcoin in their sales or tell people to buy a small amount and hold it for a certain amount of time, we are empirically showing users the power of a scarce asset like Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not yet a currency. It's in the store of value phase. It's no use forcing him to be a currency, if he's still at a level prior to that.

0 sats \ 12 replies \ @clr 26 Jul 2023

Bitcoin is both a store of value and a medium of exchange. It cannot be one thing without the other.

0 sats \ 11 replies \ @KoreaComK 26 Jul 2023

Not necessarily. A medium of exchange NEEDS to be a store of value, but not every store of value will be a medium of exchange.

https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:620/1*soWJZQE91Ti7YznaFwYraQ.png

1 sat \ 2 replies \ @rijndael 26 Jul 2023

this is post-hoc rationalization. it was MoE before it was SoV. It has lost ground on MoE

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @clr 26 Jul 2023

this is post-hoc rationalization.

Exactly. But some maxis have lost the plot and are acting as if this is just a question of "consensus" and make-believe and having a functional network doesn't matter at all. They sound almost like keynesian clowns at this point.

it was MoE before it was SoV.

I believe they are simultaneous. To be a MoE it must have value. And to be SoV it must be able to be used as MoE. One cannot happen without the other. Trying to argue which one happens before sounds like a chicken-egg problem to me.

It has lost ground on MoE

It has taken a long time between the blocks becoming full and having a functional lightning network. That caused many merchants to stop accepting bitcoin. Now that lightning is functional it should regain the lost ground and hopefully much more.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @KoreaComK 26 Jul 2023

No, it's not. It is the opposite. Only you realize that Magic card collectors. Many keep their rare and very rare cards stored as SoV. Only after they use them as MoE.

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @clr 26 Jul 2023

"Stage 1: Collectible"? WTF? Maybe we should be happy that the 'ordinal wizards' have finally gotten the ball rolling. /s

Bitcoin has been used as a medium of exchange for a very long time, at least since Laszlo's pizzas in 2010. Then there was the Silk Road (among many other things). All this is conveniently omitted in the SoV narrative. Have you ever asked yourself where does bitcoin's value come from? Stages 2 and 3 are simultaneous and interdependent. They feed on each other. Hodlers are free-riding on the efforts of people who use and promote bitcoin as a medium of exchange, and some of them are so self-absorbed that they don't even see it. Reductio ad absurdum: Why even bother with the Lightning network? Bitcoin doesn't need it to become a SoV! Just watch NgU and you'll be rich in no time!

I agree that bitcoin as a unit of account will be the last to become widespread. But we can already see some entrepreneurs pricing their offerings in sats.

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @KoreaComK 26 Jul 2023

Dude, this diagram is basically saying what Saifedean Ammous says in his book The Bitcoin Standard. If you think this is wrong, argue with him, not me. Another point, they are not interdependent. A prime example of this today is gold. It is a store of value, but it is not a currency. So this proves that interdependence does not exist. The fact that you have one or another thing being used as exchange does not make it currency. What defines it as a currency is the consensus when using it, as well described by Ammous in the book.

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @clr 26 Jul 2023

Dude, this diagram is basically saying what Saifedean Ammous says in his book The Bitcoin Standard. If you think this is wrong, argue with him, not me.

I hope that your rationale is not that you are right simply because Saifedean Ammous says so. I appreciate many of the thoughts that Saifedean brings to the table, but I've felt there is something missing in this thesis since I read it in The Bitcoin Standard.

And, again, bitcoin has been used as MoE since almost its very beginning. Even before the pizzas, Satoshi sent bitcoin to Hal Finney. This happened only a few days after bitcoin's inception.

I posit that Bitcoin's value comes from the fact that it can be 'transmitted' (annotated on the ledger) without intermediaries and censorship. And since the amount of bitcoin units is finite, each of them have a portion of the value of the Bitcoin network.

Let's make a thought experiment and assume that the blockchain froze and no new blocks could be created. Would bitcoin still be valuable? Could it still be considered a SoV? I don't think so. So, in order for bitcoin to be a SoV, new blocks need to be added to the blockchain. Blocks contain transactions. Every time a bitcoin transaction is included in a block, bitcoin is being used as a MoE. So SoV and MoE are interlinked; they cannot be separated. Bitcoin's value is dependent on its ability to be used as a MoE.

Another point, they are not interdependent. A prime example of this today is gold. It is a store of value, but it is not a currency. So this proves that interdependence does not exist.

Gold was a MoE in the past and arguably even a UoA. I believe that gold is on its way out, in the process of devolving from Stage 3 (or maybe 4) back to Stage 1. First, the UoA was captured by sovereigns, because they had the power to dictate the units of weight, measure and value in their territories (in order for gold to be a UoA, value must be expressed in weigh or volume of gold -- and account for purity). Then, gold's role as MoE was supplanted by fiat currency. As bitcoin grows, I believe it will steadily absorb gold's premium as SoV. Eventually, gold will only retain some value as an industrial commodity and beautiful shiny metal and that's it.

Bitcoin is an entirely new beast. There had never existed a functioning and lasting expression of value-as-information before bitcoin. Of course, bitcoin is linked to the physical through proof-of-work. What I'm trying to say is that, because we cannot fully explain bitcoin yet, we keep coming up with these analogies to previous things to try and explain parts of it. But, while being helpful, these analogies can be incomplete and limiting.

The fact that you have one or another thing being used as exchange does not make it currency. What defines it as a currency is the consensus when using it, as well described by Ammous in the book.

I don't understand how this ties into the rest of the discussion.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @KoreaComK 26 Jul 2023

I hope that your rationale is not that you are right simply because Saifedean Ammous says so.

Of course not, I just showed that his arrogance in this phrase "WTF? Maybe we should be happy that the 'ordinal wizards' have finally got the ball rolling" just denotes that you say that these stages are thrown from a Mankiw book or you of any other mainstream economist, when the truth was a summary of Ammous.

And, again, bitcoin has been used as MoE since almost its very beginning. Even before the pizzas, Satoshi sent bitcoin to Hal Finney. This happened only a few days after bitcoin's inception.

I say it again: What defines something to be MoE is the consensus on using it as currency. By his simple definition of "if I transfer bitcoin to someone, then he is MoE", then, there was no barter in society. After all, at that time, everything was MoE, however, by definition of what an MoE is, its concept is wrong. MoE for you may be that, but it is not what the consensus is for other people.

Gold was a MoE in the past and arguably even a UoA. I believe that gold is on its way out, in the process of devolving from Stage 3 (or maybe 4) back to Stage 1. First, the UoA was captured by sovereigns, because they had the power to dictate the units of weight, measure and value in their territories (in order for gold to be a UoA, value must be expressed in weigh or volume of gold -- and account for purity). Then, gold's role as MoE was supplanted by fiat currency. As bitcoin grows, I believe it will steadily absorb gold's premium as SoV. Eventually, gold will only retain some value as an industrial commodity and beautiful shiny metal and that's it.

This does not invalidate what I said.

I don't understand how this ties into the rest of the discussion.

What defines whether something is MoE is the consensus on its use given a society. I can't say that a chicken is an MoE just because I used it to buy my neighbor's eggs. For it to be an MoE, the society where I am inserted must also accept it, so that it can be given as an MoE.

Example: Bitcoin is an MoE in El Salvador. He is not an MoE in the US or Brazil.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @clr 26 Jul 2023

I say it again: What defines something to be MoE is the consensus on using it as currency.

I think this is the central point of our discussion.

What defines whether something is MoE is the consensus on its use given a society.

I see. I was calling MoE whatever two parties decide to use to transact. This seems like moving the goalposts.

My thesis is that bitcoin's value is dependent on its ability to be used for transactions. If the Lightning network doesn't function and the base layer is clogged, then bitcoin cannot be used regardless of what the "consensus" is. "Consensus" is meaningless if the transaction cannot be concluded because of a technical problem.

But assuming that the whole society has to reach consensus:

Example: Bitcoin is an MoE in El Salvador.

No, it's not. Most merchants in El Salvador don't accept bitcoin. By your definition I can say that the US Dollar is the only MoE in El Salvador at this moment.

So my questions are:

How is a society supposed to reach consensus on bitcoin as MoE? Gresham's Law dictates that people will choose the weaker currency as the MoE; therefore it is impossible that bitcoin ever becomes MoE.
How is bitcoin supposed to ever be used as a MoE if nobody develops the necessary infrastructure (mining, software development, Lightning nodes, channel liquidity, merchant apps, wallets...) because the only thing that matters is HODLing?
Do you even want bitcoin to become MoE?

view replies

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @0222b05f2d 26 Jul 2023 freebie

the terminology of "shitcoin" is a ridiculous part of the lexicon. juvenile because it rhymes. dis-respectable because so called swear words are used to express a feeling of bewilderment and inability to grasp or manage.