[elhudy]

>while that is true, you could also argue they deserve it because of the risk they took.

they didn't take any risk though, they just "mined bitcoins", which were more abundant then.

[rawtxapp]

Well if the price increased at 1$, and you didn't sell any, you risked it going back to 0$. From that perspective, there's a risk holding on to it.

[PragmaticPulp]

Investments are made to fund value creation.

What value did they create?

If the underpinnings of an economy accrue value purely to speculators while devaluing (in BTC-relative terms) actual assets and value creation, it has a major incentive problem.

What’s the one and only thing Bitcoiners want you to do with Bitcoin? Buy. That’s it. Any other use, including spending, is actively discouraged.

[rawtxapp]

The value they created is a currency that's not controlled by a select few people.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

1) Not a currency, 2) Debateable that it's value at all, and 3) "controlled by a select few people" is a remarkably paranoid/conspiracy way to frame that central banking is a necessary function of government.

[rawtxapp]

1) I can use it to transfer monetary value, which is good enough for me, 2) the market puts it's current value at 45k$, 3) doesn't change the fact that central planning has created a very fragile economy.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

Transferring monetary value at only 7 tps, while burning resources like a forest fire.

Visa is not worried.

[rawtxapp]

@sideburns, Visa is not worried because they are going to start offering crypto payments.

[elhudy]

That is not a "risk" in the sense of adverse outcomes. Anyone can throw bitcoins in a wallet and forget about them for 10 years. There is no risk of adverse outcome involved in doing so, and people should not be rewarded it.