[r3ctilinear]

Absolute sovereignty is the important detail that brings the strategic reserve argument into complete focus. There are many types of wealth but none of them offer the level of freedom against censorship and external interference that bitcoin does. In an increasingly multipolar world bitcoin offers the greatest degree of self sovereignty for individuals and nations alike.

[SR2Z]

Bitcoin is vulnerable to 51% attacks, and before China banned it there were mining pools that were intentionally limiting signups to avoid hitting that number.

Then there's the throughput issue, the mandatory deflation, and a ton of other small issues that make it a terrible store of value.

Bitcoin is subject to far more limitations than folks normally consider and certainly does not offer more "self-sovereignty" than a pile of gold.

[r3ctilinear]

I have been using bitcoin since shortly after it's inception. I don't buy any of your spurious claims. Bitcoin survived the blocksize war of 2016 and it's only become more durable and secure since. 51% attack is now outrageously prohibitive. Gold is a fancy paperweight that's impractical to use. Adoption is happening hand over fist for a reason. If you can't see it too bad.

[dragonwriter]

> 51% attack is now outrageously prohibitive.

If there isn't a diversity of commodity suppliers of the best ASICs, then there are obviosuly actors for whom it is not prohobitive if a motive exists. Such actors exist even if there is such a diversity, really; the assumption has really always been that no one will have both the capacity and the motivatiom for carrying out a 51% attack.

[SR2Z]

> 51% attack is now outrageously prohibitive

No, it's not! It's almost happened in the past - Google it. The rapid adoption and deployment of ASICs around subsidized or cheap electricity makes it relatively straightforward for anyone with real resources to pull it off.

> Gold is a fancy paperweight that's impractical to use

Bitcoin (the core blockchain) can only process about seven transactions per second. Don't tell me gold is impractical!

> I have been using bitcoin since shortly after it's inception

Yes, and that's the only reason you seem to able to believe these things. Tell me, what can you ACTUALLY buy with Bitcoin without requiring a conversion to fiat currency under the hood? It's not just for tax reasons, it's because it's an awful store of value and would be disastrous for any modern, long-lead supply chain to rely on.

> If you can't see it too bad.

What I see is a "currency" with such terrible liquidity and deflationary properties that Trump is planning to sell off the US gold reserve to pay out these "Bitcoin billionaires" who would otherwise be totally screwed.

[r3ctilinear]

Since the July 2014 mining pool distribution wake up call (the likely "attack" event you're referring to and blowing out of proportion) Bitcoin mining has become more decentralized and more mindful of safe hash rate distribution. The hash rate has also increased to be 4.5million times stronger(!!!) since then. Winning an arm wrestle against a ~1ZETTA hashes/second distributed protocol with an interest in self preservation is SO not "relatively straightforward" that it's funny.

Gold is utterly impractical unless it's paper gold in which case you have limited sovereignty over it. People keep cutting open gold bars and finding tungsten! lololol

The TPS works fine for me. So does store of value. So does layer 2 transactions. A new global monetary standard has arrived whether you like it or not.