1/ Bitcoin has a PR problem. Estonia and Colombia hosting the White Paper is a good step toward changing that. It shows how it is the TECHNOLOGY of Bitcoin that is the revolution. Do you agree or disagree?
2/ It seems obvious that a country like India would want to create their own digital currency and ban decentralized crypto. Once the government passes legislation that gives them undue powers, they don't tend to give it back. What do you think? Too on the nose?
1. It definitely has a PR problem. Partially because there is no official entity that can represent it. The individuals for/against Bitcoin are driven by their own self interests a lot of the time. Although, a Bitcoiner will know when another Bitcoiner is speaking from facts, rather than conjecture. Countries hosting the white paper is an amazing step towards revolution. I agree with your statements.
2. Banning Decentralized Cryptocurrency is an oxymoron. If it is decentralized, it is by definition unable to be banned in any meaningful sense. There has been anti-crypto legislation in the past implemented by other countries, but it simply doesn't work. Government bans on anything doesn't make that thing go away, ever, it never has and never will. Ex. Cannabis, Alcohol, Firearms. The only thing a ban does is create a black market for the item wherein the item trades at a premium. Nigeria has a ban on Bitcoin right now, and P2P trading has exploded since then. Bitcoin trades at as much as a 25% premium.
The real risk of governments getting involved in cryptocurrency is not the ban, it is them creating their own central bank digital currency that doesn't represent, or hold the interests of the average individual. Countries all over the world are creating digital versions of their currency. This is the real danger. There is the potential for them to build, and implant very nefarious features within the system. Features such as selective censorship on your spending, automated withdrawals from your bank account, and straight up just turning your money off. These features should never be implemented in any money system as they infringe on some of our most vital rights as human beings. Basically our right to own our money, and thus our time. Stolen money is stolen time, because time is money. We cannot let our monetary system evolve into this beast. That'll be the undue power that will be very difficult for them to give back.
Thanks Keegan!
1/ Bitcoin has a PR problem. Estonia and Colombia hosting the White Paper is a good step toward changing that. It shows how it is the TECHNOLOGY of Bitcoin that is the revolution. Do you agree or disagree?
2/ It seems obvious that a country like India would want to create their own digital currency and ban decentralized crypto. Once the government passes legislation that gives them undue powers, they don't tend to give it back. What do you think? Too on the nose?
1. It definitely has a PR problem. Partially because there is no official entity that can represent it. The individuals for/against Bitcoin are driven by their own self interests a lot of the time. Although, a Bitcoiner will know when another Bitcoiner is speaking from facts, rather than conjecture. Countries hosting the white paper is an amazing step towards revolution. I agree with your statements.
2. Banning Decentralized Cryptocurrency is an oxymoron. If it is decentralized, it is by definition unable to be banned in any meaningful sense. There has been anti-crypto legislation in the past implemented by other countries, but it simply doesn't work. Government bans on anything doesn't make that thing go away, ever, it never has and never will. Ex. Cannabis, Alcohol, Firearms. The only thing a ban does is create a black market for the item wherein the item trades at a premium. Nigeria has a ban on Bitcoin right now, and P2P trading has exploded since then. Bitcoin trades at as much as a 25% premium.
The real risk of governments getting involved in cryptocurrency is not the ban, it is them creating their own central bank digital currency that doesn't represent, or hold the interests of the average individual. Countries all over the world are creating digital versions of their currency. This is the real danger. There is the potential for them to build, and implant very nefarious features within the system. Features such as selective censorship on your spending, automated withdrawals from your bank account, and straight up just turning your money off. These features should never be implemented in any money system as they infringe on some of our most vital rights as human beings. Basically our right to own our money, and thus our time. Stolen money is stolen time, because time is money. We cannot let our monetary system evolve into this beast. That'll be the undue power that will be very difficult for them to give back.