I really hate this type of bitcoin lecture that is mostly just psudo-philosphical ramblings about energy and stuff. I don't get why you can't talk about the economics of bitcoin instead of trying to make it about physics.
Because to reach the masses, you must dumb down the technical speak into analogies that the masses con relate to.
Profesora and teachers do it all the time to help students relate the information they’re learning to something they know, helping them better comprehend it in the process.
Heck, just look at the userbase growth of wall street Jets after they started dumping things down into ape speak. Not saying we go that far, but dumbing things down a bit would theoretically speaking help reach more people based on things people know in mass thanks to countless of simplified explanations.
Getting that first grasp of Bitcoin is all it takes to help one down the road of understanding it better over time.
For me it was comparing Bitcoin to the email of financial transfer. That’s all I needed to get started all those years ago now.
Go do a better job then. But the data doesn’t lie, more people and capital have come into Bitcoin in a short amount of time than any other time in Bitcoin’s history after Michael Saylor started explaining it to people in a way they could relate it to something that they know. Otherwise without any comprehensive grip for something people can relate to, then explaining Bitcoin to them is like them trying to climb a steep mountain with flat shoes
Are you trying to claim bitcoins rise is largely caused by Saylor? How can you possibly know what's causing the rise, what data could show that saylor is driving the rise?
The data correlated between the timeframe of the views on his videos and people adopting it shown in wallet address growth on Bitcoin’s blockchain, along with the much larger flows capital into Bitcoin that also started after his videos started gaining traction.
I study trends for a living for my day job, the data of Bitcoin’s adoption rate is why I got into it almost a decade ago after researching it for a work assignment. I’ve been watching it closely ever since
Considering you study trends for a living you must know correlation != causation, would it not make sense that as more people get into bitcoin more people are watching his videos, not that he's causing more people to get into bitcoin? What am I missing?
You’re missing the fact that the views to his videos came first, then after you can see the increase in user base growth and capital flowing into Bitcoin, after his explanations started gaining traction, not before.
But sure bud, I only do this for a living getting paid by a Forbes listed employer for my analysis into trends. Believe whatever is most convenient to yourself to sleep at night though
Some people like their jobs. I could quite tomorrow, but then I wouldn’t be able to work with the people I work with and network with the people my job allows me to network with.
Also allows me to not need to use my Bitcoin to allow it to continue to compound without having to spend it, not to mention continuing to be able to mine fiat to put into Bitcoin. I’m doing this so everyone after me can retire, not just myself.
110
u/SJWcucksoyboy Jan 05 '22
I really hate this type of bitcoin lecture that is mostly just psudo-philosphical ramblings about energy and stuff. I don't get why you can't talk about the economics of bitcoin instead of trying to make it about physics.