Never heard of him, sounds like a swedish guy. But Robert Breedlove is a total maximalist and he says "bitcoin was first, nothing else can be first" all the time, but i never understand it.

I understand your point even less, honestly. Sorry if im frustrating.

So bitcoin is the discovery of resistance to replicability (i'm guessing you mean it is trustlessly non-inflationary/non-replicating, immutable ledger which is designed to be uncrackable even by its creators, and designed to not have a central failing point?)

For sure I agree with that. Do you think price of commodities comes from scarcity? Price is much more than that. There is no such thing as objevtive value which determines price. Everyone values all things differently. Price comes from unregulated buying and selling and haggling in markets. Nothing else! If I took a gold nugget to a remote south pacific island where they hated shiny stuff, the price of my gold would be ZERO dollars. I obviously would try to find a better market..

So no, the scarcity of being "the first" is not interesting as a predictor of price in the long run. In ten years, if there exists a coin just like bitcoin, except it's accepted everywhere and is way faster and cheaper to transact, do you think people will invest in bitcoin? How about in 20 years?

I also think bitcoin has significant value. Not as much for me to buy it at the current market price, though, but I don't care about money enough to speculate in either anyway, I don't speculate on any coin. I love Breedlove, but sometimes I get an uneasy feeling that he has "invested" a lot into bitcoin and that forces him to maintain this totally uncritical perspective.

I'm trying :) I know that's hard to believe. Such is the curse of dogmatic belief.

Here's a chart of PoW coins sorted by their trade volume in the past month.

Why wouldn't it beat bitcoin? I'm not implying that I care if it does or doesn't. Why are you so sure it can't?

Indeed, what else?

I'm not advocating for any specific coin. I do like monero, if that's relevant to you, but I'm sure they have issues as well.

What I am saying is, since we don't know "What else?" exists or can exist, taking the position that "nothing else should exist" is a certain death sentence. Evolution, you know. Without natural selection, you suddenly realize that you are not the gods of the earth, but the indigenous tribes of south africa. You realize it when the spanish come.

XMR is also FOSS. And it isn't a fork of Bitcoin.

Can XMR devs stop users from selling? swapping? forking? If you can opt-out that barely matters.

What about other forms of centralization like ASIC mining mostly being produced by two manufacturers and concentrated on large coporate mining farms?

How about Bitcoin Core being ~99% of node software? https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/software.html

Foundry and Antpool produce almost 60% of blocks. Their mining pools also require KYC.

Tail Emission and Dynamic Blocksize is a better choice for something trying to be an MoE p2p digital cash. Bitcoin will be unuseable by 90% of the world and only sparingly by the rest with it's growing tx fees and limited blockspace. The more you use it the poorer you get. https://monero-bitcoin-fees.vercel.app/

Almost 15 years and Bitcoin is still not private and not fungible in the real world (not only on a protocol level). Far cry from Eric Hughes Cypherpunk Manifesto.

You can claim the properties of Bitcoin make it a better SoV than Monero. But ultimately, any future price prediction is speculation. You can only control supply, but have no control over the other side if the equation. The fickle winds of demand.

Thanks for the attempt anyway! If you think of anything more i'd love to hear it.

I know you don't talk to "shitcoiners" (people that may expose your lack of knowledge, authority as a "bitcoiner", and reputaton), and I do not expect a reply. But I'm writing this because I was wrong, in the part of my post where I said "this is nonsense".

I asked a friend of mine to explain liquidity, I asked him if my sentence "This is nonsense" was actually true. It isn't. My example with gold and silver, for instance: If I have a huge amount of silver and use it to buy all the gold in town, which I then hoard forever, then I've destroyed the liquidity of gold. In this way, my example can be an example of money competing for liquidity. So I was not correct in regarding it as gibberish. If e.g. litecoin becomes more liquid than bitcoin, then it is easier to trade. If more transactions are made with litecoin (as was the case briefly in june of this year), that means it might be adopted instead of bitcoin, giving it even more liquidity. My position is that litecoin is a better version of bitcoin, so I don't care (i just want strong crypto, so we can make the world a better place). But if you believe that bitcoin is better, and even if you believe that every coin is worse than bitcoin, you are not dishonest here. You want crypto adoption. That's fair.

I care because the maximalist ideology is a cult in the exact same sense that jihadism is a cult. If you saw your compatriots start joining ISIS, would you not try to understand why? And if you found that a shared trait of many of those who joined, was a single person, someone who riles them up and makes money off it? Yeah I care.

Your friend group, which kicks you out if you don't value and speculate on the same commodity as them, these are people you would classify as being of an Austrian mindset? A group which not only discourages the free market of ideas internally (do they not discuss monero because they "don't care", or is it because they fear being outcasts?), but also actively use trolling, "toxicity", and confidence tricks, in order to discourage other bitcoiners to stop talking or thinking about the value of other things?

You believe/propound that you know the price of all crypto that is not bitcoin. Maximalists believe the "objective value" of any shitcoin is zero. This is not Austrian. It is literally marxist.

I understand that you want a world without overlord regulators (as I do), and you believe the ends justify the means. But, as an Austrian like you must understand, more perspective means more vision. Your movement hurts crypto.

Again, if your cult kicks you out for experimenting, dismisses you as a "fly eating shit", because they know the truth already. This you describe as libertarian? Your argument that I'm imposing on you for questioning your group- is fundamentally different from your group discouraging questions in you. You are not free to find new perspectives, you must all share the same valuation of bitcoin and of all other currency, therefore your collective intelligence is exactly equal to the thought leader that has most influence among you. I'm sure there's no incentives for that person to act maliciously..

I agree. Blockchains with "less environmentally wasteful" algorithms, or "smart contracts", that's not interesting to me either. They're bullshit. But litecoin is exactly like bitcoin except it is more resistant to centralization. Disregarding litecoin, encouraging others to disregard it, is therefore compromising the core value of bitcoin: A decentralized, trustless, peer to peer ledger.

I agree with this as well, it's certainly a great cognitive dissonance for me to have such feelings, as a lifelong anarchist. But, to give some context, Sweden (Scandinavia) is not like other places. Are you libertarian in dealing with your family? E.g. if your little brother is retarded, do you let him die because you father forces you to pay "taxes" and help him survive? No. But not because of refusal to subordinate to an authority, only because you like your brother, and trust your father. Scandinavia has the most tightly coupled social cohesion of any place I've been to (lived 2 years in the US, a few months in south america, a while in china). In a real sense, Scandinavians are siblings, whereas the greater country (imo) called USA, the people are more like cousins. So if I ever get to move to America, I will again be full libertarian.

I've had my house raided by police, and I know it can happen any time, I can't defend myself (no right to bear arms here!). I'm not happy about that. But I've stopped considering myself anarchist. End of political rant that is maybe not so interesting to you :)

Of course I want that, I want every single bitcoin enthusiast to hang out and talk and solve shit. When I said "hill" though, I meant it as an analogy to not wanting to interact with other crypto enthusiasts. I want to hear their perspectives as well. Because more perspective, is more vision. And the central bankers, our common enemy, are not weak.

For sure agreed, shortcuts to avoid thinking are to be very wary of. These people who label / pigeonhole foolishly, I label them "labelers".

Jokes aside, sometimes I find labels (used on myself) sort of brave. E.g. I'm an atheist. I hated thinking about myself like that before (when i was younger than 29ish) because it's a factual statement that I do not have know the truth of. So, it's unscientific, it's a lie. But I am an atheist. A "God" is just too simple an explanation. Nature is way more interesting than that. Who knows? My self-labeling is a way to be honest about what I feel, rather than prioritizing never being incorrect.

Definitely agree that most altcoins are scams and get-rich-quick bullshit. Do you certainly believe that all altcoins are either scams or worse (technologically) than bitcoin?

For instance, PoW. Is that optimal? Trustlessness by way of requiring so much energy in order to cheat that it's mostly unfeasible. Obviously PoS is bullshit. But there are others. What about proof of space? Instead of using computing power as your limited resource, they use storage space. You fill a harddrive with random stuff based on some public hash of the chain, then to mine a block of transactions, you search your harddrive (quick, due to merkle tree partitions) for a row that has, like bitcoin, a digest lower than the current block difficulty. Submit your block plus that row plus the key, baby you got a PoW alternative!

Most interesting is Monero. There's a reason it's loved by developers and mathematicians. It's truly incredible. Are you interested in learning about why it is fascinating? Maximalism will force you to ignore good solutions, in the same way that the church suppressed astrophysics for so many years. And there are people who gain a lot by acting maximalist. People who use fake confidence, fake domain-knowledge, in order to get customers to buy into them as a thought leader. And on this site specifically, in order to get you to buy subscriptions to their blogs.. Once you have a thought leader like that, you are a slave.

If you're interested in knowing a bit about Monero, I can recommend this page. It has the original whitepaper, an extended whitepaper with a ton of criticism and addendums, and a third party review of the whitepaper from a real mathematician (it's aimed at semi-laymen). This review is hilarious, and it is very negative to a LOT of aspects of the original monero whitepaper. How often do you see bitcoiners link to critiques of their own protocol? Your maximalist thought leaders certainly will never. This social manipulation strategy is well known, easy to recognize. Here's what I'm talking about, and below it is the monero research page with the papers.

In the end, both silver and gold can be used to buy bananas.

So, to take the opinion to it's end point, you believe soviet russia had greater quality than america? (States are of course just companies with monopolies on violence). Its cool if you do, ive never met a communist here, I dont judge. Just curious