He's a retard and bitcoin is a scam but he makes good points about the US dollar collapsing. Knowing this where should I put my money? Gold? Ancient Coins?
>>60886862Genetically engineered catgirls research.
nano. It's what bitcoin professes to be, and can't really be improved upon, with the fairest distribution possible
>>60887796idiot
>billionaire whose company is based on "I buy bitcoin at all time highs because it always goes up"wish i did that back in 2016
Get a good lovign trad wife, she would keep it good
>>60886862>where should I put my money? Gold?And silver.
>"he is a retard">future trillionairethe cope will be unreal
>>60887957try to refute my post, I'll wait
>>60887796>fairest distribution possibleinsiders farmed their own captchas, midwitit's economically impossible for anything to have a fairer launch than bitcoin, which is why no altcoin will ever replace it. bitcoin dies long after every other alt live today has failed.
>>60889485>insiders farmed their own captchas, midwitWhich "insiders"? The price of nano was miniscule during the faucet, so the only people "farming" it were those for countries with weak currencies. It would have been far more sensible for an "insider" to simply have bought coins off the exchange. You totally embarrassed yourself here.A pretty genius launch, given how it naturally targeted people in countries who stand the most to gain from a functioning global non-inflationary currency. It also couldn't be replicated today, due to the proliferation of AI. Meanwhile, bitcoin's inflation is ongoing, and is ruining the lives of those that live near the mining centres.
>>60888512The fact you're still denoting his wealth in dollars betrays your argument; bitcoin is a grift, not a currency
>>60886862Gold and family.
>>60889508the guy who made it, and those associated. it's why nano has had one of the most centralized distributions of any alt from the beginning.it was never qualified to be money or value.
>>60886862>bitcoin is a scamyou're delusional, fiatceljust jump off a bridge at this point
>>60890105now provide evidence, should be easy to do given the public blockchain, but you'll do no such thing
>>60890112you're a delusional bitcel, 7 TPS btw
>>60887796>hurr cryptoAny "coin" that has a company behind is 100% disqualified.If a company makes it, it's a product, not money.The only exception is bitcoin.
>>60890563except the Nano Foundation own no nano lolmeanwhile is technically incapable of being currency
>>60890620btc is*
>>60889508I agree with you. I currently hold 60k XNO, down from 100k, and I’ve lost faith in the coin. Maybe there’s something about proof-of-work and bitcoin we don’t fully understand yet but will in the future. Is there any realistic reason for hope that doesn’t rely on delusional ideas like “hidden forces are suppressing the #450 coin”?
>>60890680realistically: it is unbeatable in the payments arena. Just watch the weak attempts of people trying ITT. One would expect then at a minimum, a slow growth of consensus of this factmy personal belief: it will form a part of XPayments, there's a lot of clues out there for the nano-elon connection. Such a reveal would flip the narrative overnight, robbing bitcoiners of their "muh price" strawman. I've made some connections on nanotrade if you look it up
>>60886862
>>60890709Look at Bitcoin when it was 10 years old. The community was vibrant, hopeful, and profitable. It kept expanding, with real people becoming wealthier, more influential, and gaining real power. XNO, after 10 years, feels like a small, desperate, and impoverished network. I can’t ignore the stark difference between these two communities. When I compare their rate of growth in political and economic power, the contrast is undeniable.I don't think there is any clues in Xpayments. It is a talk in the same way of XRP and GME or Q-Anon. LINK can provide the sources from the institutions. We know that the cooperative of Banks Swift is working with LINK from SWIFT own statement and papers. Can you provide anything at all that this huge company is planning to use XNO? This must be necesdary documented.
>>60890754The nano community as far as I can tell, are the only remaining crypto people that are actually interested in a cryptocurrency (as a currency). Which other crypto's even have a currency symbol?Bitcoiners in 2025 just jack off to the headlines about how much the pizza would be worth today; LINK holders have been patting themselves on the back for finding LINK since 2017 (with no smart contract adoption in the real world, as their CEO goes on shows saying how "people are going to get a yield from gold"???).If a company was actually going to adopt a publicly traded coin, do you think they would announce it before the fact? How many public "partnerships" have we seen in crypto that led absolutely nowhere? Meanwhile, Elon has publicly described nano as close as possible (without naming the ticker), there's a top 10 holder with "emuskx" in the address, and he's publicly slated both bitcoin and fiat whilst championing crypto in general.This is why any talk of suppression is just schizophrenic; you don't need to suppress anything, just make all the surrounding garbage seem more exciting and profitable. It's straight from "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade". Although it is cringe that the jannies here delete nano threads on sight
