Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
LynAlden | 3 months ago (raw) | export | reply | flag +57 
 Supposedly he gave up social media years ago. But people still act like maybe that’s his real account.

Does anyone seriously know who controls that account?
https://m.primal.net/JifD.jpg
▲ ▼
TKay | 3 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Not Luis CK. 😂

I honestly think it’s him. But regardless he is a Bitcoiner so we have that goin.
▲ ▼
ThyLobster | 3 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Hey nostr:nprofile1qqsw4v882mfjhq9u63j08kzyhqzqxqc8tgf740p4nxnk9jdv02u37ncpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9uju6mpd4czuumfw3jsz9nhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wsq3yamnwvaz7tmsw4e8qmr9wpskwtn9wvql3tqm. Can I ask for help with something please? I'm not very versed in economics but I noticed this in Michael Saylor's presentation and I was wondering if I'm right or if I'm missing something:

So according to saylor, if you have 6.5 coins (or whatever amount) would could potentially have a crazy amount or Dollars in 20 years.

But my problem here is that - the reason why you may have millions in 20 years because the dollar is worth less (inflation) than 20y ago. In other words, it's the same bitcoin value, but the dollar just isn't worth shit and you need 1 million to buy milk. 

So, when he says you will be "wealthy" that's not really true. 
This insistence is measuring the value of bitcoin in dollars seems futile in the long run. It seems to me we should perhaps use gold as it's depreciation is far more stable and maybe say 1btc = 20 gold coins and in 20 years 1btc = 23 gold coins. 

Does any of this make sense? Sorry for the long paragraph. I really appreciate you patience to read it.
▲ ▼
Gustl | 3 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 1 Sat = 1 Sat
In 20 years you just buy your milk with sats and don´t swap your sats for dollar to buy milk with this dollars.

Or at least i hope it´ll come like this
▲ ▼
JoJ | 3 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 People usually talk about future value in today's dollars, not the futures dollars. If someone says bitcoin will be worth $1m by 2030, they mean that in today's dollars. It will buy what $1m will buy you today
▲ ▼
agustavson | 3 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Jeff Booth makes a similar (though not exactly the same, if I remember correctly) point in his recent interview with Natalie Brunell, which I highly recommend. I think the point Saylor is making is that you WILL be enormously wealthy, in terms of purchasing power and holding the hardest asset on earth, but he’s probably using USD to make the point sensible/comprehensible for a wide audience. It takes a number of rounds and some mental yoga to get to the point where Jeff’s approach really lands. If that makes sense?
▲ ▼
SatoshiRamanujan | 3 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Yeah you’re talking about purchasing power and it’s true that even if BTC is worth $1m in [x] years it doesn’t mean that it will have the purchasing power of $1m today. 

However the adoption and finite supply are also positive factors that also increase the value (in purchasing power terms) of Bitcoin.

So in [x] years when Bitcoin is worth $1m in USD terms, will it have the same purchasing power as $1m today? No. But will it have more purchasing power than what $65k gets you today? Yes.

Does that make sense ?
▲ ▼
nycatx | 3 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 I don’t know who runs it, but it is not the comedian Louis CK. A while back when the account was trying to agitate bitcoiners by arguing against the merits of bitcoin, the person actually posted their face and admitted they are not LCK (via what I believe are since deleted tweets)