Limited supply is not irrelevant or “factually wrong” for a long term store of value (like gold) which is more the role BTC plays specifically.
[1] https://static.wixstatic.com/media/e17377_2a348fd21fc543f9a0...
We’re talking about advantages and capabilities - specifically granted by crypto of which self-custody is a prerequisite (yes technically true of stock, but not indexes and not as comparable). Within that context it has advantages over other options and more capabilities.
I’m not pretending it’s better at everything or it should be 100% of your holdings or anything like that, but it is better at some things and the new capabilities it provides are interesting and valuable.
That chart is a limited slice of time. The nice thing about economic bets is it doesn’t really matter what you (or I) think, the market will play it out. I suspect you’re probably wrong, but we’ll see.
Focusing on this despite the rest of what I wrote is still kind of missing my point.
There’s not really much point in further discussion, there’s not much more to say. We just don’t agree.
But feel free to disagree, of course. The evidence doesn't care if you don't agree with it. It's still there, for everyone to see.
You have a clear motivated reasoning bias (crypto = bad and useless) paired without understanding the basics of how crypto works.
You don’t have conversations with people, you just ignore details that disagree with your pre-existing conclusion and focus on digressions you think prove your point (typically against a strawman argument I’m not making).
Your submissions betray this bias too. Crypto (and conversation) is more interesting when considering the nuanced bits even if it may disagree with “your side”.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/PeSzc9JTBxhaYRp9b/policy-deb...
You’re right about one thing though, the evidence is there for people to see.
That isn't exactly arguing in good faith, to use your own words.