I think you have the term “Proof Of Concept” confused.
Googled with reference to crypto currency;
Proof of Concept, often abbreviated as PoC, is a consensus mechanism used in decentralized networks to validate and confirm transactions. It serves as a critical component of various blockchain-based cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, and many others .
Googled generally:
A Proof of concept (POC) is the process of gathering evidence to support the feasibility of a project . Project managers perform a POC in the early stages of development before committing too much time and resources to a project.
Because BTC is here and in use ( I can log onto a retailer that accepts BTC and buy goods/services right now using BTC) it is not a concept, It was a concept that has now become a reality.
To understand that you would just need to read the white paper which the creator of BTC wrote, here is a copy; Satoshi Whitepaper
I copy/pasted part of the 1st paragraph below which gives an indication as to the reason he/she created it.
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. No mechanism currently exists to make payments over a communications channel without a trusted party
So we could say BTC was created to provide an alternative way to pay for something where the first and second party can have trust without a third party (Visa/Mastercard/Bank Debit Card).
So effectively people are investing in “a different way to pay for something”, not very exciting when you look at it like that. The people holding lots of BTC certainly don’t need a different way to pay for something. Ultimately BTC is finite in supply so it immediately has a scarcity attribute, when scarcity increases the value rises.
It’s some new weird form of automated central bank and monetary network that is global and neutral, and can be accessed by anyone without needing permission, that is working completely independently of the banking system.
I mean ISK would definitely need something like this at its core, as it works in an adversarial environment. With a regular central bank one of the empires or some centralized institutions they all trust would have to be in charge to run it. With something like Bitcoin such an institution is not necessary as long as everyone agrees to follow the same protocol.
If you have an idea, you need to implement that idea to be sure it’s working, as well as its limits. That’s what a PoC is for.
It’s typically made with lax constraints, eg no concern with regulations, security, locations, etc.
Nothing.
It’s a toy. You play with it. People may break it.
For many people, it’s a way to abuse other people, therefore it’s a scam first.
Well ok, yes, I suppose Bitcoin was created as a POC and the white paper describes the benefit of using Bitcoin. I suppose Satoshi mining a million BTC and then using 10 of those bitcoins to complete a transaction with Hal Finney is proof of the feasability of the bitcoin/blockchain creation.
The concept is a decentralized architecture to store transactions, with several algorithms to interact with it.
BTC is an implementation that proves that it is possible to implement, and allows to investigate on the tradeoffs of such an implementation.
The issues addressed in such a concept need to be each scrutinized to evaluate the value of such an implementation regarding such an issue.
It’s not binary “it works”, it’s more like “okay but in reality what issues does this create ?”
When I say PoC, I oppose it to industrial application, that is produced to have an economical value. Basically BTC was not produced to be used by people as a mature solution, generating profit for its owners. So it does not have a role to fulfill to be useable.
This is wrong. the white paper clearly presents the issue it is solving and where it’s uses in society would be.
The scam is the financial advisors AND the very early Bitcoin holders/miners promoting this “BUY BTC!!! HOLD BTC!!!” ideal because they realise the scarcity attribute will make the value rise higher due to it’s finite nature.
Personally and unlike you I am actually going to hold PEOPLE accountable for this mess and not a computer system (BTC and it’s Blockchain). People can be greedy by nature and many have no problem exploiting others for their material gain.
If people used the Bitcoin and blockchain just as Satoshi described in the white paper (no 3rd party needed for transactions) then we would litterally have an alternate payment system that people could use as and when they please and simply buy enough BTC for the transaction they are doin and no more.
I’m sorry but it was far too easy for the dodgy financial advisors and early bitcoin holders to manipulate us into buying massive amounts of BTC and holding it which would only really serve to raise the value of the BTC they hold. We idolize these rich people and want to be just like them but many of us are just used and cast aside.
Personally, I think when BTC reaches a certain value we may see many of the big BTC holders cash out because the value of BTC will be too high to resist which will leave all of the smaller BTC holders in a bad situation because the value of BTC will be lower due to the scarcity of BTC becomming low.
I guess this viewpoint is relative, if you accept that in this world the only way to perform a transaction over a communications channel is with using a 3rd party then yes I suppose the person with that view will never ever have any sort of use for BTC.
The issue is there are a small handfull of people in this world who don’t want a 3rd party involved in their transactions. We can also see entire countries (El Salvador) who don’t seem to want this either. El Salvador could be going about it the wrong way I am not entirely sure, but their viewpoint is very clear, many feel that they don’t want a 3rd party involved.
It is not illegal to have the viewpoints many in El Salvador may have, I guess they are just sick and tired of the big financial machine they have limited control over which is a reasonable viewpoint.
Your “if” is not real.
Therefore your claim that goes after that “if” is not real either.
So yes, in reality BTC is a scam.
BECAUSE people use it for speculation.
The REALITY of BTC is that it high usage is mostly due to its SCAM use. And also laundering.
People whom you can convince about BTC are people who are interested in the REALITY of BTC, not the theory. Those people are the one also getting scammed.
I’m not talking about history, but about how people should present it to those who don’t know about it.
The “if” is very real, despite your opinion which seems to totally ignore the valid use for it and the fact there ARE some people in the world using it completely legally for trading goods/services.
We are totally free to believe exactly as we please, obviously this does not make what we believe facts. For some reason you have to ignore El Salvador and what they are actually legally doing with BTC which is totally fine for you, Just please don’t expect other people to follow in that level of ignorance, and to not get challenged on your view, everyoneone has eyes and a brain and can read and understand perfectly fine.
Sorry, I don’t have the type of mind to completely ignore facts like “many well known retailers in the world use BTC as an alternative payment system” and then go on to come to a solid conclusion where facts have been ignored through my lack of understanding.
I’ve already said (probably 120 times over a few threads) that I use BTC to purchase goods from the internet so therefore I only purchase enough BTC for that transaction. What I have been suggesting is using it in THIS manner instead of people investing large amounts of money to buy and hold BTC in the hopes of the value magically doubling.
Personally I think you have a poor idea of what actually happens in the world regarding finances and transferring value, it seems that you are far more concerned with being right than understanding facts.
Accept it or not, but your opinion will never be solid or even worth responding to if you continue blatantly ignore apparent facts that everybody else accepts.
I’m totally cool, it would seem you are not. All I did was type about a fact which can be easily confirmed and then I used that fact to form an opinion. You told someone there is no end goal to BTC which is a falsehood. It’s better you say you don’t know.
The end goals of BTC are obviously transferring value without a 3rd party, creating an alternative value transfer system, creating a ledger that can’t be manipulated, promoting trust between 2 parties (business partners can trust that a BTC ledger is accurate and never been tampered with).
Those seem to be the end goals, I can definitely understand how these end goals might be difficult to see due to everybody talking about BTC as if it’s an investment. The point I was making earlier is that there are some people in the world that actually use BTC for the end goals I mentioned. My point was also to leave BTC alone if one does not need or benefit from the end goals I mentioned.
Pointing out a fact which can be easily verified isn’t a problem, it’s real life I’m afraid.
You’ve lost me on this point I have no clue what you’re talking about.
If we analyse this article from Michael Saylor we can see that he has made outrageous claims about BTC saying in 2045 1 BTC could be worth £13 million…
Michael Saylor and his company own over 226,000 Bitcoins, so if the world-wide public keep on buying and holding Bitcoin to double their money this will only serve to raise the scarcity attribute and increase the value of BTC and put maichael Saylor in a position to cash in all BTC for real life cash.
So BTC value is at approx £46,464 per BTC which would value Michael Saylor’s BTC at around £10 Billion. If the public keep buying and holding this could push the BTC value up to £100,000 each which will value Michael Saylors holdings at around £20 Billion.
I’ll be keeping an eye on these Bitcoin whales, if all of the whales decide to sell there will be absolute chaos and we will see the value of BTC plummet and many of the public will be left with BTC that isn’t worth much.
When all the whales have sold their BTC the saga will still continue with younger BTC whales convincing everyone to start buying BTC again and the cycle continues.
The problem with Sam Bankman Fraud is that the BTC was missing from customer holdings in a crypto exchange he managed. Had he left the BTC in customer holdings and not touched it he wouldn’t be in any trouble. So it seems in this case there was nothing actually wrong with the BTC itself it’s just that the BTC had been used for investment without customer authorisation and then the value of BTC decreased causing these investments to fail.
Yes, when I say it should have been used as satoshi described (to complete transactions without a 3rd party) I just mean if someone requires that type of service then go ahead and use it. At no point did Satoshi say “BUY BITCOIN, HOLD BITCOIN TO DOUBLE YOUR MONEY!”
So my point is to only use it for transactions (which means people will only buy enough BTC for the transaction they are doing and not spending their entire life savings to buy and hold BTC for the value to magically increase)
I said my “if” is real beacause…some people do use BTC on a transactional basis meaning they ARE NOT buying BTC to invest, but are using it as a kind of internet currency, hence they only buy £50 worth of BTC if the retail shopping they are buying adds up to £50.
I never implied that or never meant to imply that. It is crystal clear by my previous posts if youre bothered to read them that I also think people use BTC for scamming. I am also aware people use BTC for retail which is not a scam.
Not at all, You clearly wrote
Because YOU have this viewpoint you are obviously completely ignoring the fact there is a legitimate use for BTC which is what some people actually use it for. I stand by my statement fully as it is clear from your own writing and opinion that you are ignoring a lot.
If you are so offended by somebody pointing out a fact you really shouldnt be on a public forum where you will obviously get people picking apart and disecting what you type.
I created this thread to further my understanding on if BTC is a tool or investment and have found it interesting, It has been long established that many can see BTC is being used as a kind of ponzi scheme where we have sales advisors and BTC whales pretending BTC value will magically raise, they are happy for us to buy and hold BTC to make sure their BTC raises in value.
Don’t change the terms you employed.
You did not say it should, you said IF
Stick to what you actually said, or correct them if you made a mistake. Don’t try to sneak in a context change.
No. Your “if” was that ALL person do, not SOME. That’s because you wrote “just as” which excludes any other way to use BTC.
Whats more your initial claim use “would” which implies you know it’s not real.
then we would litterally have
And what I’m saying about that, is that it is hypothetical claims, therefore dogma.
You are again making chill arguments based on nothing but your ideology and magical thinking.
No I’m not. That “obviously” of yours is BS.
I did not write such a thing (what I ignore), that claim of yours is a judgement on me that brings no argument to the conversation, that is, a personal attack.
You’re literally eluding my argument by making judgement on me. THAT is what “personal attack” means.
Therefore it’s a scam.
Just because you CAN have legit use does not mean it’s not a scam.
Just because it was not designed to scam people, does not make it less a scam.
You don’t judge a scam based on what it fundamentally is. You judge it as such based on how it is presented to you. When the vast majority of people who promote it do it for their own vested interest and against yours, then yes it is a scam. As long as BTC is presented as an financial investment, for which it’s worse than regulated gambling, then it’s a scam.
Yes, because some use it as a ponzi, some use it for retail…like it was intended.
So my statment…“if BTC was used as satoshi intended…” is valid and accurate because it is a factual description of what’s happening because I can clearly see people are using it as a ponzi AND as a tool.
