![How to Find Low-Competition Keywords with Semrush [Super Easy]](https://static.semrush.com/blog/uploads/media/73/62/7362f16fb9e460b6d58ccc09b4a048b6/how-to-find-low-competition-keywords-sm.png)
How are Bitcoin ETF's & Banks/Institutions a good thing?
Satoshi states in the white paper that bitcoin is supposed to serve as a peer-to-peer, decentralised digital currency without the need for banks. Nobody even uses bitcoin for peer-to-peer transactions, they just buy & hold (or sell later). It's treated like an investment more than anything. It's used to be pretty prominent in the dark web, but other crypto currencies have taken over. How does this not undermine it's core function? And reason for creation? Banks, institutions & governments are buying bitcoin by the thousands, with estimates predicting that they will own the majority of circulating bitcoin within a decade. It seems like the government, banks & institutions came to the understanding that it's not feasibly possible to "kill" bitcoin, but by simply adopting bitcoin, they actually directly threaten it's very reason for existing, without the average bitcoin enthusiast even realising. And many even supporting it. That's what confuses me about the pro-institutional adoption crowd. You have to ask yourself: What is bitcoin's utility? Why is bitcoin worth something? What are the long term consequences of large scale institutional adoption? submitted by /u/PlatinumUrus [link] [comments]
Satoshi states in the white paper that bitcoin is supposed to serve as a peer-to-peer, decentralised digital currency without the need for banks.
Nobody even uses bitcoin for peer-to-peer transactions, they just buy & hold (or sell later). It's treated like an investment more than anything. It's used to be pretty prominent in the dark web, but other crypto currencies have taken over.
How does this not undermine it's core function? And reason for creation?
Banks, institutions & governments are buying bitcoin by the thousands, with estimates predicting that they will own the majority of circulating bitcoin within a decade.
It seems like the government, banks & institutions came to the understanding that it's not feasibly possible to "kill" bitcoin, but by simply adopting bitcoin, they actually directly threaten it's very reason for existing, without the average bitcoin enthusiast even realising. And many even supporting it.
That's what confuses me about the pro-institutional adoption crowd.
You have to ask yourself: What is bitcoin's utility? Why is bitcoin worth something? What are the long term consequences of large scale institutional adoption?
[link] [comments]
