Bitcoin Is Time

Bitcoin is deflationary thus by nature it lets you lock in your time-value.

It takes 1/10th the time to initiate a funds transfer via crypto (eg. Bitcoin) as it does to effect the same wire transfer or ACH using most banks's treasury management systems. This, and the fees can be less depending on the token used; but are considerably less if the transfer is cross-currency. The transit time is about the same if BTC is used, less if one were to use XLM (Stellar) for example.

A Ponzi scheme is a specific type of financial scam and Bitcoin, even with the least charitable definition, does not fall under that definition.

Needing new buyers for price to increase is not the definition of a Ponzi scheme. Because that is true for any speculative asset due to the price setting mechanism. Your argument entails that the price of Bitcoin is highly inflated over its fundamental value, i.e. that it is a speculative bubble. Speculative bubbles are very different from Ponzi schemes. A Ponzi scheme has the following definition according to the SEC: >“A Ponzi scheme is an invest­ment fraud that pays existing investors with funds collected from new investors. Ponzi scheme organizers often promise to invest your money and generate high returns with little or no risk. But in many Ponzi schemes, the fraud­sters do not invest the money. Instead, they use it to pay those who invested earlier and may keep some for themselves."

Ponzi schemes require a central fraudster to pass on money directly from old to new investors with the underlying asset obfuscatedly held on promise by the fraudster.

With cryptocurrency the buyer has control of the commodity, you actually have control of the crypto, there is no promise of a consistent return with little risk, there is no central entity defrauding targets with promises that hold the asset in reserve passing on money directly from new to old investors.

What we do have is a speculative bubble which will no doubt be devastating for new investors when it collapses. But the definition of a Ponzi scheme is not met.

> That's right, all criticism of bitcoin or cryptocurrencies is necessarily down to jealousy, and therefore can be safely dismissed.

It all depends on the audience, but on HN in particular you are right. The site is rife with people who could not fathom the value at launch and who've been in denial since without ever putting the work to learn about the ecosystem.

Notice how "debates" around cryptocurrency on HN never delve into technical arguments, and compare that peculiarity with discussions on Reddit for example.

This is the article that made things finally click with me. Thinking about the pre-WWI gold standard and the issues that existed there and the improvements that Bitcoin brings around time, consensus, etc.

The baseless negative comments with no interaction with the article content confirms for me that Bitcoin is on to something. Sour grapes syndrome is a result of pride, I think.