Thread - Nostr Hypermedia

The latest episode of the Radio Rothbard all started with this quoted note on #nostr. I decided to pick a fight with Austrians from the Mises Institute to try to drag them to the Bitcoin Overton window and targeted Per Bylund specifically, taking issue with his dismissal of @Michael Matulef quoting Parker Lewis - and it worked. @Conza helped in the ensuing flame war with eventually @Phil Geiger and @Bitstein taking up the mantle. Per got himself stuck in a “Schrödinger’s money” loop which led to his writing the article on which this podcast was based. There is a great opportunity for #Bitcoin content creators to continue this and make those within MI reckon with Bitcoin by continuing the argument - there’s plenty to nitpick! Maybe @Matthew Kratter will provide some analysis, or even @Saifedean Ammous or @Stephan Livera View quoted note →

Replies (2)

Toxic Bitcoiner 🛡️ 10 months ago

I watched this one, but it was rough. They didn’t say anything significant. They didn’t talk about the properties of money and why that makes Bitcoin the best possible money. Seems like they are struggling with Sunk Cost fallacy.

StackSats.IO 10 months ago

↩ replying to Toxic Bitcoiner

They rehashed Per’s article which was pulled apart on Xitter. He very briefly mentioned some of the criticisms (ie not being able to use one fiat in another country) but they didn’t engage those ideas at all - like why is the Guyanese dollar money when it’s used in an economy the fraction the size of Bitcoin’s but then Bitcoin isnt? Per would only accept Bitcoin as money if he could use it at the local shops and when told he could do that and the merchant doesnt even have to accept it, it can be converted to any other money at point of sale, again that just breaks the framework of these guys understanding.