> Meanwhile 1.7 billion people around the world do not have a bank account

...therefore we need bitcoin? Is this the new spin? People don't see it's a tech that was invented without a use case?

Many people don't have electricity too, what are you talking about?

It also seems broadly ignorant of technology in the last decade that has done far more for unbanked people than crypto currencies.

UPI and M-Pesa have had far reaching effects to this regard. This narritive that crypto helps the unbanked is not true.

If I'm wrong about crypto helping the unbanked, please provide any context or numbers to back up this claim.

P.S. Let the poor countries solve their own problems, if you want to help donate money directly.

Yes that's what I was saying I fully agree other tech has had way more impact on the unbanked. :)

Well then I appreciate you and respect you. Much love.

High five!

> People don't see it's a tech that was invented without a use case?

Have you read a single quote from Satoshi Nakamoto? He's very clear about the use case... many times.

I just searched and read a single quote from "them"(?):

“If you don’t believe it or don’t get it, I don’t have the time to try to convince you, sorry.” — Satoshi Nakamoto

That was fun, thank you.

> Meanwhile 1.7 billion people around the world do not have a bank account.

Do you know why the majority of those people don't have bank accounts? Because they have no fucking use for it! They either have no money (how does crypto help those people?) or they use banking services through their family/friends.

Do you know what 3.7 billion people don't have? Access to internet.

> Do you know why the majority of those people don't have bank accounts? Because they have no fucking use for it!

Everyone has use for a way to store their wealth, no matter how small. Economies that use money, in whatever form, are much more efficient than those based on barter.

> Do you know what 3.7 billion people don't have? Access to internet.

Yes, Bitcoin won't help people without access to the internet. There are still hundreds of millions (maybe billions?) of people that DO have access to the internet, but don't have a reliable way to store their wealth, either because of irresponsible governments or central banks.

You know what governments and central banks can do to the security and issuance of Bitcoin? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

And that's very valuable to some people.

> Everyone has use for a way to store their wealth, no matter how small. Economies that use money, in whatever form, are much more efficient than those based on barter.

Oh ffs, what are you talking about? Do you think that the poorest people on earth are poor because they choose not to deal with money? Will they store their blanket and cup on the blockchain? My god.

> You know what governments and central banks can do to the security and issuance of Bitcoin? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

What is preventing a government from getting >51% of mining power and just wrecking havoc on the chain? Afraid of governments but can't think of the possibility of them taking over mining operations or just fucking up the internet to take it down. Is it wilful ignorance or naivety?

How does crypto solve that problem? Bitcoin has had a 1 year minimum of $30,000 and a maximum of $68,000. Etherium has had a 1 year minimum of $1200 and a 1 year maximum of $4800. I don't know about you but putting all my savings into a "currency" that is so volatile. "Stablecoins" don't seem all that stable either. Plus you have the high cost of transactions for many of these "currencys".

Stablecoins are perfectly stable, right up until the moment they aren't. They're only as good as the legal regime actually forcing the stablecoin provider to fulfill their promises of backing.

At that point, why not just bank with the legal regime you're already implicitly trusting?

Those people use already hawala (under whatever local name). Do they even know about bitcoin?