Wrong.

Netflix and Xbox are producing entertainment on their platform. By that logic you could say Warner Bros. isn’t producing anything too but we know that they are producing movies.

Netflix sells subscriptions and have thousands of employees working for the company.

Bitcoin doesn’t do that because fundamentally it’s a different asset.

Stock vs Commodity

It could continue to be a misconceptions for who knows maybe forever, apart from the new direction at which Bitcoin is phasing, when government begins taking Bitcoin as reserves to help their economy in the long run, Bitcoin was created as a decentralized system to help out those who do not believe totally on the fiat system which is controlled by the government. All the said misconceptions are no much of what was expected as more people begin to make Bitcoin an option for their store of value, investment and used for payment of services instead of the common fiat imposed by the government.

Bitcoin was created as an alternative of fiat and not imposed, leaving income as fiat or investing into as fiat only puts the individual at risks as soon as the currency begins to devalue due to strike of inflation. The easiest way of maneuvering such losses is by encouraging Bitcoin, i rather stick with personal benefits than losing the value of my money to government policy and unwilful abilities to combat inflation, all in the name of helping the growth of society meanwhile the governments are manipulating the best they can to have more to themselves.

If any, I'd compare it with social networks. Bitcoin can be seen as a social network of money, with better characteristics than any earlier attempts.

However, it's not 100% accurate to compare it with social network service providers: Meta, for example, in reality sells advertising space; users are the product, not the customers. Basically, they sell attention.

In the case of Bitcoin, we don't have such a centralized operator selling a product. Miners are such an entity (they're "selling" security for the network) but they are not a central, single entity. And their service is only directed to the users of the network. "Scarcity" is also not necessarily an attribute which works as Bitcoin's "product", as demand can fall below supply in bear markets, and there is no guaranteed demand curve.

Bitcoin's value proposition is really complex. There are for example four major price theories managed by investors (Total Addressable Market, Social Network, Cost of Production, Stock-to-flow), but none explains the whole picture. It's a mix of at least the first two, I would rate Stock-to-flow's and Cost of Production's fundamental importance as negligible (only as self-fulfilling prophecies traders use to fix their objectives)

.
I think there are quite safe, "deflationary" investments even in our "fiat world" (real estate, some metals and other materials, for example ... some would also say gold but I think gold is more on the risky side). So the choice imo already exists. Bitcoin is a good additional choice but I think the wellbeing of the financial system doesn't depend on Bitcoin existing as Store of Value or not. For me the other characteristics I mentioned in the last post are more important (censorship resistance, decentralization, global availability). We may agree to disagree on that though

I actively say that holding forever is not a good thing for Bitcoin. You know that in real life, normal inflation is good but deflation is not good, there are many real-life proofs to back up this argument. Bitcoin is a deflationary cryptocurrency, that's why so many people want to hold it forever but at the same time, I think that we have to be generous. If I hold Bitcoin forever, you hold and millions of people hold, especially early adopters who own most of Bitcoin, yes, the price will go up because there is a demand but the price would go up much higher if we were actively using Bitcoins. More Bitcoin usage for payment means more demand and pressure on businesses to accept Bitcoin payments. Then, the more people use it actively daily, the more businesses and people start using of Bitcoin. The more people enter into Bitcoin, the higher our market cap will be and the trading volume will significantly increase. This will automatically increase the Bitcoin's price.
I think that the price increment from what I said, will be much higher and better than the price increment from holding. I think that if it becomes hard for people to buy and use Bitcoin, then they'll move on to other cryptocurrencies.

Yeah, it's like different collars if we are talking about types of jobs.
But BTC is a different beast in itself, which is discussed pretty well here in this thread.

When you realize that Bitcoin can make it easier for you to make cross-border transactions, that's when Bitcoin becomes the most effective pioneer compared to fiat money. Yes, Bitcoin does not produce anything, when you save 1 Bitcoin since 2012, the amount will remain the same in 2024. However, because its value continues to increase, investors are competing to want to own it. Investors consider Bitcoin to be a worthy investment to gain greater profits, especially if they are prepared to hold it for the long term. So, you need to pay more attention to its function and purpose, if demand exceeds the amount of supply, then the price will increase, Isn't that what is expected.?

The sole purpose of bitcoin has not been realize and that is why bitcoin is redundant about the production of goods and services and currently bitcoin is so much attached to the fiat currency that making bitcoin not to be productive. I have not used bitcoin to buy or pay for anything and whenever I want to use bitcoin it is through the fiat currency which I must convert it to before using. I am really waiting for bitcoin to be used as the sole currency in the local market to buy whatever I want as BlackHatCoiner for now it is only transferring value to the future which is also good because it saves life in the future. But what about the present? There should be a solution for the present.

Actually people ask that, and gold 'produce' many stuff, from merely a 'useless' jewelry to a sophisticated electronic and technology, of course what I meant by 'produce'  is more of gold is used in those items. Bitcoin definitely doesn't produce anything, but the value of Bitcoin is the underlying technology and features. What bitcoin offer is more than just a physical product but a features, so until there is a crypto or other technology that offer the same feature as Bitcoin, Bitcoin will still very valuable, even if it's not produce or used in any product. 

The time preference was one of Saifedean's best arguments for Bitcoin and I loved the example that he used with mere children offering them x amount of chocolate but x amount more if they wait say and hour or so extra, the child would always choose the 2nd option because they were going to get more of something. The same principle applies for hodling bitcoin, we hodl because that coin is going to be worth much more long term!

I have heard that argument in Italy too, during last weeks (november and december 2024).
Just for let you know.


But at that moment, my point of view is closer to the following:


In order to better understand that point (very close to "Value investor" point of view),
try to put a OIL jar in your basement and see what is its return after a year.
Then do the same with one btc in your hardware wallet.
Then do the same with a Gold bar.

Nothing returns. So you have to trust only in a price variation. Not more.  

Then try to cultivate a field and see what its returns: wheat or similar. And you can sell it and hold the field.
Then buy a bond: your will receive a yield every year.



Yew, they do.

Of course, when and if BTC will become a Store of Value aside of Gold (see https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/5522752.0), BTC will be considered as a Real Asset. Collateralizable.