[dnomad]

This is not true.

Bitcoin was heavily marketed as a currency. It failed at this.

Bitcoin was heavily marketed as decentralized where no single entity owns 51% of the network. In fact Bitmain likely already does or soon will control 51% of the network [1].

The remarkable thing here is that despite these clear, observable failures... Bitcoin will go on. The true believers will continue to HODL and while shorts may pile on in the absence of fundamental economic data there's little reason to buy or sell. The price now is purely a popularity contest.

[1] https://bitcoinist.com/bitmain-51-percent-bitcoin-hashrate/

[craigc]

I think you are missing my point. If Bitcoin is “marketed” as anything, it is by people who got interested in the technology, learned about it, and started to spread the word to other people.

You could say the same thing about many open source software programs or apps.

What I was saying is that there is no company behind Bitcoin that represents it or speaks for it. When you say “Bitcoin was heavily marketed” you mean that people explained it that way to others.

[dnomad]

You might read the Bitcoin paper written by the inventor of Bitcoin. There is absolutely no doubt that Bitcoin was originally and has always been marketed as a currency. I can see why you might want to deny this but, please, it's insulting to try and rewrite history when the facts are widely known.

[craigc]

I have read it multiple times, in fact. I am not denying that it was originally intended as a peer to peer currency, but saying it was marketed as that when the creator was publishing an academic paper of sorts and releasing it for free into the world is a bit of a stretch. Marketing implies that there is a customer you are trying to sell a product or service to.

He or she did not care about getting rich since the original coins have never actually been touched. The creator did not even know that people would start to exchange existing currencies for Bitcoin at the time the paper was published or that it would catch on at all.

I am not trying to rewrite history. I was only stating that Bitcoin is not a company. There are no big corporations controlling it. There is no sales team. There is no marketing team. Anyone who promotes it is doing it out of their own free will.

[DonHopkins]

Let me point out that you're accusing other people of glossing over what you wrote, when they're actually saying they've already heard all the stock fallacious arguments and tired marketing slogans you're regurgitating, while you're glossing over what they are writing.

So let me repeat an important point that you just now glossed over yourself: Your attempt at rewriting well known history is insulting. Hacker News is not the proper audience for your Bitcoin marketing, not the proper venue to insult people's intelligence. Please stop insulting us by acting like it is.

YOU by your own free will and greed and behavior are an integral part of the decentralized marketing team whose existence you deny, and it's insulting that you keep repeating the same things while glossing over what other people keep telling you.

[joering2]

Correction: doing it out of greed, more than free will.