How is investing in something that people need being a slave, but investing in something no one needs being free? If I invest in dollars I hold something that masses of people need for paying off debt owed to banks. I am the master, not the slave. On the other hand, if you traded dollars for Bitcoin you are the slave because you need other people to invest and buy your Bitcoin otherwise you cannot get your dollars back. It's hilarious how you Bitcoin evangelists think that you're the masters while in reality you're the slaves.

Suppose that someone invented a crypto postal service. Or is short a crypto-post. Its purpose is to transfer envelopes and boxes quickly, safely, and decentrally. However, there is a catch. The envelopes and boxes are empty. They hold nothing. From the outside, the crypto-post would look similar to a traditional post. Because obviously, a traditional post transfers envelopes and boxes. And that crypto-post transfers them as well. But in reality, it would be the dumbest thing ever invented given that the very reason envelopes and boxes exist is to serve as a container for holding letters, documents, and products. Their purpose is not to be empty.

The so-called crypto-currencies, such as Bitcoin, are exactly like our hypothetical crypto-post. From the outside, Bitcoin looks similar to traditional currencies. It is a system that has units which are transferred between people. If you have a bank account or a banknote, what you have is some name such as USD, and a number that represents the quantity of units in a banking system. If you have a Bitcoin account you also have a name - BTC and a number that represents the quantity of units in the Bitcoin system. But the catch is that the units in the Bitcoin system are empty. They are just like envelopes and boxes in our crypto-post. They are containers that hold nothing.

On the other hand, units of traditional currencies are containers that hold something. They hold debt. Namely, these units are created as loans of commercial banks to individuals and companies or as purchases of government bonds by central banks. So if you have for example dollars you have something that the government and millions of people need for satisfying debt owed to the US banking system. If your neighbor has a $500K loan with a mortgage on his house, while you have $500K you have something that can save them from the mortgage. You have a product needed by them, just like letters, documents, and products transferred via postal service are needed by people.

Given that units in the Bitcoin system are not created as debt, they are empty. They are containers that hold nothing. Often, people say that Bitcoin is simple and thus better than a complex banking system that manages fiat currencies. But of course Bitcoin is simple given that it manages empty units. Fiat currency units hold debt and managing debt is complex. It includes contracts, credit assessments, collaterals, foreclosures, etc. And this requires resources, both material and human. With Bitcoin, the author just wrote a protocol that tells people: "You have 10 units", "you have 0.5 units", "you have 50 units", etc. But units of what? A company? Something tangible like a precious metal? Something intangible like a patent, copyright or software license? No, none of that. In the Bitcoin system, people buy and hold units of literally nothing. Units that are empty. That is why it is so simple. Managing empty units is simple. But extremely dumb. Just like it would be managing empty envelopes and boxes in our hypothetical crypto-post. With Bitcoin, such managing even requires the consumption of enormous amounts of electricity. That's why Bitcoin is the dumbest thing ever invented.

But the whole point is that Bitcoin is not an asset.
-snip-

If you think it is dumb then what about the other crypto currency?
And if it is a dumb thing invented why is it still in the industry and one of the most popular and highest price in cryptocurrency market?
There are so many people who are against Bitcoin or crypto, but most of them would just ignore it and continue with their life.

This is like saying that an empty box is an asset. No, that what is inside the box, that what the box holds is an asset. Bitcoin box holds nothing. So there's no asset in the Bitcoin system. But understandably, people like to believe the opposite. If someone spend $70K on an empty box they obviously won't admit they bought nothing. They would say that they bought an asset. A digital gold. A precious intangible commodity. Whatever. It's a Freudian defence mechanism.

<snip>

I know that you people need Freudian rationalizations, you need to play dumb to justify your purchases of empty units. But these rationalizations look pretty hilarious in the context of the OP. The distinction between a unit that holds an asset and a unit that holds nothing is obvious. If I were to ask you what asset is held by the BTC unit what would you say? Debt? Equity of a company? A picture like Mona Lisa? A patent, copyright, software license? Wheat, silver, oil? You couldn't say any of that because BTC units hold neither intangible (digital or whatever) nor tangible asset. They are literally like empty envelopes or boxes. They are containers that hold nothing. That's why you are forced to use Freudian rationalizations like the above. Just imagine the stupidity: a guy wrote a protocol to tell that you hold a non-existent asset, you paid a lot of money for that and now you comfort yourself that this is like buying Mona Lisa. Crazy. It's no wonder people view you as a cult.

So basically, your argument is that an empty box that someone sold you for $70K is not actually empty. The trading act magically make a valuable product, an asset to appear in it? Although when you open it you see with your own eyes it is still empty. You know how this is called? Being naive, gullible and delusional.

Yes, the moment the box was assigned value and liquidity makes it stopped being empty. When you open it in the blockchain now, you will know what you called empty is no longer empty anymore as block values are constantly being assigned. Bitcoin is a complete system that will do all that fiats can do (if allowed) with no exception. This is possible because it is an asset, a digital one for that matter. But this digital/virtual denotation is where you are missing it, or perhaps you just do not want to accept it.

Whether you like it or not, there are classes of assets, and the digital asset is one of them, which will not do less of any asset if you operate it through the right channel. Bitcoin was empty, it is not empty anymore if that will suit you in the plain term and at this point I urge you not to rely on your understanding of this alone. For it to be digital/virtual doesn't make it less of an asset, it is indeed an asset, not until you see an asset physically before it can be valuable or be used for particular physical projects like what Gold, Diamond, Oil, etc are being used for. Once they can still purchase those physical assets (Gold, Diamond, Oil etc) that you mentioned, they are not less valuable regardless of the form they are.

Nothing is empty in Bitcoin anymore, values and purposes are being signed regularly, you should go and learn how the blockchain works even if we try to neglect the trading aspect that proves it valuable. And this is a reality, my friend, it is never delusional.

It is not everybody that likes Bitcoin, there even people who hate Bitcoin outside the forum and you can no hold back the opinion of those people towards Bitcoin, the OP have just drop his own opinion which is an opinion that is as dumb as his topic, I can't understand what he is explaining on the other comments he has written on this topic. Every of the reasons drop is not even sensible enough to justify the title.