The market keeps talking

I used to listen to Majamalu talk about what was happening in the Bitcoin-BTC forums: the deleted posts and messages, the systematic blocking of users, the insults, etc. From his statements, I inferred that these spaces had become subsidiaries of some kind of cult. I found it hard to believe 100% what he was telling me until I decided to go in and leave an opinion in a Facebook group: all I did was point out, without disrespecting anyone, the reasons why I believed that Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is better than Bitcoin-BTC.

Majamalu had already warned me about what to expect, and I must say he was right. I received a flood of responses, almost all containing mockery and insults. But not all. The only argument they presented to me was a striking one: “the market has already spoken.” They implied to me that, due to the significant difference between the price of bitcoin-BTC and that of bitcoin-BCH, people had already decided in a free market which was better.

It is true that in the world of cryptocurrencies there are no impositions and everyone can choose freely. That said, I think it's worth clarifying something that blind BTC fans insist on ignoring. The vast majority of people are still trying to understand what cryptocurrencies are, how they work, how they are issued, what advantages they have over alternatives, etc. They were created not long ago and, like all revolutionary innovations, generate skepticism and many, many questions.

But those who allow themselves to doubt and investigate patiently tend to be the ones who ultimately reap the rewards, just as those who delved into the subject from the beginning did. These pioneers were labeled as naive or delusional, if not criminals, while the “specialists” predicted the imminent extinction of Bitcoin.

Those who mocked bitcoiners at the beginning, pointing to the scarce transitory value of the cryptocurrency, or to the dramatic drops in its price, are today the ones who mock those of us who criticize the negative change that occurred in BTC, and they do so using the same arguments that were once used by supporters of fiat money and central banks.

We used to defend BTC from attacks coming from all fronts. We did this because we understood its advantages and believed that this currency had the potential to compete with fiat money, not to support it as today's BTC supporters propose. For us, the existence of a form of electronic cash p2p is essential to put limits on the expansion of state power. That’s why we fought, from the beginning.

However, it is necessary to reiterate the question that Majamalu raised in one of the episodes of the podcast: would BTC have taken off as a project if Satoshi Nakamoto's proposal had been what BTC supporters propose today? That is, if a cryptocurrency had been created with extremely high fees to force people to use it as a store of value or to only make transactions of thousands or millions of dollars; or if it had been presented as an alternative for making transactions as slow or slower than bank transactions; or if it had been necessary to rely on intermediaries to send bitcoins at a lower cost; or if its promoters invited us to continue using fiat money for almost all our transactions… What would have happened?

Upon entering the current BTC world, one has the feeling that many of its members arrived late to the crypto ecosystem and invested in BTC without really knowing what they were doing, and without having basic notions of economics. And since the increase in the price of BTC does not exactly promote reflection among this type of investors, they react defensively to anything that might force them to reconsider their decisions, such as BCH, which still keeps Satoshi Nakamoto's project alive.

Claiming that the market “spoke” is nonsense. The market is talking all the time; nothing is definitive for the market. Whoever believes that there is no turning back, that nothing is going to change, either does not understand how the economy works, or is trying to make a (bad) defense of their investment.

This point can be exemplified by the competition between Whatsapp and other messaging applications. I remember that years ago, when text messages could only be sent through Whatsapp, other apps also offered voice messages and even video calls. But, as they say, the early bird catches the worm. The market, which as I mentioned earlier is always talking, could have also punished Whatsapp if it hadn't advanced, and that is why the company improved its service. In fact, recently, the privacy concerns that Whatsapp offered were capitalized on by other companies in the sector, such as Signal and Telegram, which achieved unexpected visibility and a surprising increase in the number of users in a very short period of time.

And the punishment for the consumer may even be more severe in the future, as the market has not finished speaking nor will it ever. Whatsapp decided to take action, improved its service first and then provided explanations to try to clarify the privacy issue. The BTC developers do the exact opposite: they continue down the same path proudly, and assure us that this is just the beginning; that fees will continue to rise and that we should celebrate it.

Meanwhile, the market keeps talking, even if they want to silence it.

BTC2.57%
BCH2.88%
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • Comment
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
No comments
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)