[chrisco255]

Not a startup. They don't just go from seed round to IPO on idle. The founders had to invest thousands of hours and immense stress to get it to IPO. Meanwhile a holder of 1000 BTC from 2012 probably continued to work their day job until 2017 when they incidentally became multi-millionaires.

[phatfish]

This is the reason bitcoin will never be more than a way to move funds illegally and for a few gamblers to trade it online.

Society is fine with startup founders and "employee number 5" making their fortune because they put in actual effort to build a company.

The bitcoin millionaires happened to mine a few coins in 2011 before most people knew about it and then just did nothing as you said. Zero contribution to society from making that paper (or bit) fortune.

Why on earth would everyone else not on the right internet forum in the early 2010s make the few that were fabulously rich?

Investing in stocks is a similar passive income, but at least in that case the investors money is going towards some business that pays a wage to workers or provides some net benefit to society (hopefully).

[arcticbull]

A start-up is just any company that's founded, usually with aspirations, and what I'm saying is that, technically, you can throw anyone you want on your cap table at formation [note]. I'm not saying it's typical or common, just that it's fundamentally possible. Same with founder compensation.

Bitcoin as a "passive investment" is such a lame comparison because it does, literally, nothing, just like hanging onto some beanie babies. Beanie babies, but much more wasteful.

[note] Anyone who's an employee or an accredited investor.

[chrisco255]

There were thousands of people who participated in Bitcoin's early days, tens of thousands by 2012. And back then they were giving away Bitcoin on faucets. You could also mine it with a basic graphics card.

It's not a lame comparison at all. If you bought Bitcoin in 2010, you've seen a 8,900,000% ROI. The asset may go up another 10-1000x from here. Bitcoin will outlast Uber. And if you're still comparing it to Beanie Babies 11 years later, it's likely you don't understand finance or blockchain, and you haven't been paying attention to what's happening in the past few years.

[arcticbull]

> The asset may go up another 10-1000x from here.

Or it may go down to 0. Your assertion is as likely as mine, and you’re not basing it on anything it all. Past performance != future performance.

> Bitcoin will outlast Uber.

Ok, that doesn’t mean it’ll be worth anything. Or if it does that doesn’t mean anyone will have their keys haha. Every random walk down the timeline results in 100% of keys lost haha.

> And if you're still comparing it to Beanie Babies 11 years later, it's likely you don't understand finance or blockchain, and you haven't been paying attention to what's happening in the past few years.

It’s because I’ve paid attention. Citing the divine scriptures of satoshi isn’t sufficient dismissal.

[chrisco255]

It may. I mean, oil just went negative a couple weeks ago so anything is possible.

When analyzing an asset class you have to look at probabilities. Probability of Bitcoin going to zero during a financial crisis, where people are losing faith in local currencies around the world:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/article/Lebanon-PM-bla...

https://cointelegraph.com/news/demand-for-bitcoin-surges-in-...

...is near zero. It's much more likely that adoption continues and Bitcoin matures as a financial asset class, not just in the developing world, but here in the U.S.:

https://www.cryptopolitan.com/caitlin-long-to-build-a-crypto...

https://decrypt.co/resources/bakkt

https://bankless.substack.com/p/9-going-bankless-w-maker-and...

As for the random walk and 100% of keys being lost...maybe if you march out the timeline long enough, the whole human species isn't going to exist any longer...so there's that. But I would argue strongly that Bitcoin (and Ethereum) has better prospects than any other digital infrastructure.

In the mean time, the next few decades look very bright indeed.

[arcticbull]

> When analyzing an asset class you have to look at probabilities. Probability of Bitcoin going to zero during a financial crisis, where people are losing faith in local currencies around the world:

BTC has dropped 50% in value over the last three years, while the currency has inflated 5%. I know which I'd rather hold. Actually I'd rather hold neither, I'd rather be invested.

> It's much more likely that adoption continues and Bitcoin matures as a financial asset class, not just in the developing world, but here in the U.S.:

Fewer people care about it than practically ever:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=bitcoin

> As for the random walk and 100% of keys being lost...maybe if you march out the timeline long enough, the whole human species isn't going to exist any longer...so there's that. But I would argue strongly that Bitcoin (and Ethereum) has better prospects than any other digital infrastructure.

20% of BTC has already been lost.

Probably more if you count Satoshi's wallet, which likely belongs to Paul Calder Le Roux, currently working with the DEA as penance for his many, many crimes. [1]

The price is largely propped up through a massive fraud perpetrated by Tether and Bitfinex. All the folks with those heavy, heavy bags have no interest in surfacing it, as it has become too big to fail within the crypto community.

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/was-bitcoin-created-by-this-inte...