>Looking to the future doesn't make me want to transact in BTC right now.
And that's fine. Contrary to popular belief, most core Bitcoiners are not particularly interested in "converting" non-Bitcoin users. There was a big group that bought Bitcoin as a (risky) investment in fall of last year who try to pump it up, but they don't even share many of the core values of the Bitcoin community.
I do want people to be educated about their rejection of Bitcoin (i.e., "because tulips" is just annoying). But it sounds like you are making an education call.
So that's fine. I don't think traditional fiat is at any risk of becoming obsolete in the foreseeable future. We can co-exist side-by-side.
I hope you can afford us the same respect.
PS: I do strongly disagree with "bankless people need banks". Bankless people need to not be exploited, and the kinds of banks that accept people poor/no credit are usually not ethical/moral organizations.
With that sentence, I meant that bankless people suffer hardship because they can't get access to basic banking services like savings accounts, currency exchanges, and money lending.
Simply because a financial institution that provides those services transacts in bitcoin doesn't make it any more ethical/moral than a traditional bank. While it's true that bitcoin doesn't have a central monetary authority, you still need a gateway to exchange currency for BTC (currency exchange), some way to safely store your private keys (savings accounts), and lenders.
For most bankless people, a trusted third party is going to be involved somewhere along the way, BTC or not.
>With that sentence, I meant that bankless people suffer hardship because they can't get access to basic banking services like savings accounts, currency exchanges, and money lending.
That's exactly who I'm talking about. And I think this will be the group who adopts Bitcoin, because there's a lot of friction in that market. Bitcoin is being seeing major adoption by markets with significant friction (silk road -> gambling sites -> ?).
>While it's true that bitcoin doesn't have a central monetary authority, you still need a gateway to exchange currency for BTC (currency exchange), some way to safely store your private keys (savings accounts), and lenders.
And that's fine. Contrary to popular belief, most core Bitcoiners are not particularly interested in "converting" non-Bitcoin users. There was a big group that bought Bitcoin as a (risky) investment in fall of last year who try to pump it up, but they don't even share many of the core values of the Bitcoin community.
I do want people to be educated about their rejection of Bitcoin (i.e., "because tulips" is just annoying). But it sounds like you are making an education call.
So that's fine. I don't think traditional fiat is at any risk of becoming obsolete in the foreseeable future. We can co-exist side-by-side.
I hope you can afford us the same respect.
PS: I do strongly disagree with "bankless people need banks". Bankless people need to not be exploited, and the kinds of banks that accept people poor/no credit are usually not ethical/moral organizations.