>>2029753
Hence why I want to create a thread here on 4chan. And I will.
Yes, Bitcoin appears to decentralize government. However, I am under the impression that a new "government" raises. That new government would be called "the blockchain."
Despite "decentralization" of government, it would appear that the dominant form of governance becomes preservation of the blockchain. And as such, for preservation of the block chain, the block chain would militarize individuals so that it would be protected.
Does anyone see this as a possibility?
This is what's called an "autistic fantasy"
No normie will ever pay for something with .0067131 "Bitcoin" over actual money (not to mention money the jews are in full control of)
>>2029784
Haha yeah, good thing there aren't projects that specifically cater to making the experience of crypto more user-friendly.
Oh wait.
>>2029769
Possible, yes.
At the same time, you could use it for opposite purposes.
Example: imagine a country's central bank decided to shift everything onto a national, or sovereign, blockchain.
This would put an end to fractional reserve banking; the central bank can now issue all money themselves and have it be blockchain-based. Easy to track, totally transparent, etc. Furthermore, they go further and base every single economic asset in the economy on this sovereign blockchain: the national currency, bonds, stocks, housing titles, car registrations, etc. All economic activity is now, in one way or another, centralized under the central bank, which can observe virtually *all* economic activity within the country and use this data to dictate monetary policy accordingly.
Likewise, they can use smart contracts in conjunction with blockchain-based money to create smart money. Imagine automatic taxation: money is taken automatically when you get your salary, when you make capital gains from an investment, when you inherit something, sales tax, etc etc.
>>2029844
I don't see it. If it's controlled against inflation, there would be the distribution of wealth still occurring. And the double-spending problem would still be resolving itself through that system. But then it would have to compete with Bitcoin, which already exists. So, I don't see that as a possibility.
>>2029844
then government would finally have competition and a reason to become efficient.
>>2029844
I don't see this. Why would people use the government crypto over a decentralized one?
Decentralized crypto poses an existential threat to states because of its potential to starve them of HUGE amounts of tax revenue in the coming years.
When states lose control over tax and money supply they lose everything.
The two supposed certainties in life: Death and Taxes. Well what happens when we see the death of tax?
You can fight club it all up as much as you want.
BTC is a centralized piece of trash and all things in its ecosystem are equally as shitty as it is.
Be prepared to become the first big collective internet patsy.
God Damn this is going to be HILLARIOUS.
I CAN'T believe you haven't realized that this may 22nd that all the bitcoin notsees are being setup for assassinating the markets.
This will not be good for them.