| > Do you extend the same reasoning to fiat? I was asking about fiat because many of your criticisms equally apply to fiat. > No. The question is: what does the trustless blockchain offer when you still have to rely on a centralised trusted entity. I answered that multiple times already. > Which immediately means that whoever got in early and got the first initial supply is at great advantage compared to anyone who got in later. For example compared to any people born 20 years from now. That's, unfortunately, the case for almost anything of value. > Could. Maybe. Should. Perhaps. That's all you can ever hear from crypto proponents. I'm not sure I would consider myself a crypto proponent, I was trying my best to answer your questions as objectively as possible. But it seems you are very emotionally invested in this for some reason... Did you have a bad experience with crypto? |
They... don't.
> I answered that multiple times already.
You haven't. All you're saying "o let's have this centralised trusted entity that does something with blockchain because blockchain".
> That's, unfortunately, the case for almost anything of value.
If bitcoin is a currency as you would have us believe, then this is not what a currency should be.
> But it seems you are very emotionally invested in this for some reason...
Ah yes. There are only a few ways crypto discussions go: problems are dismissed out of hand and/or "have you had bad experience with crypto" (often in the form "you're just sad that you didn't get in on it early").