[rawtxapp]

> people who have counter-narrative to the Bitcoin propaganda aren't financially incentivized to be negative about it

They are incentivized to be negative about it, because whether you like it or not, not buying into it has real opportunity costs. If it ends up becoming the global currency, then you'd be left behind.

[loceng]

That's quite the mental gymnastics: no - they won't be left behind, unless regulatory capture forces people to use Bitcoin vs. say USD - which is exactly why they won't be left behind, and exactly why most people aren't going to buy Bitcoin because why the hell would they want to decrease their wealth by paying into a system that transfers wealth from later adopters to earlier adopters? It's a Ponzi-Pyramid scheme because of the MLM structure + the rest of society doesn't want to be the ones "left holding the bag" as it's said in Ponzi schemes.

People aren't stupid, though there are greedy and gullible people who like to gamble and speculate - and their hope that Bitcoin will have some competitive advantage over any numerous other structures that aren't incentivized via financial gain - but are actually good for society - and not leading to "consensus" via financial gain but through actual democratic processes where, if it makes sense to, a blockchain not structured like a Ponzi-Pyramid scheme can be voted into use by its citizens.

[yks]

You will be left behind just like all the unborn billions of people. Bitcoin version of the future is catastrophic at worst, with all the unnecessary energy consumption, or inconsequential at best, cause it won't matter much for the future people how their wealthy elite got into that position.

[rawtxapp]

While they may be unborn, their parents and grand-parents aren't. As long as there's a carbon tax on the energy consumption (for everybody, not a single industry) and energy comes from increasingly green sources, I don't see any problem with it, I don't expect us to be burning coal for energy in 30+ years from now.