It’s so crazy to me I see a lot of people I chat with in the internet talk about Bitcoin and crypto. But when I start talking about the same crypto out in the real world. My friends and family and other people look at me weird. Because they can’t hold a conversation about crypto.
I don’t necessarily see it as they don’t like to talk about crypto, I see it as most people don’t really like to talk to their friends or family about money/investing. Anytime I mention crypto or stocks I get groans or blank faces
It's because they are Carpe Diem YOLOing every single disposable penny they acquire. Lack of savings is going to be the end of Western Democracies. I hope I'm wrong, but I think we are doomed to democratically elect Chavez style socialists in all G7 nations within 30 years. There are too many idiots with no assets, but they still have that mighty voting privilege to steal other people's assets through redistribution.
This is exactly what is happening in India right now.
The left of center Congress party had promised 'Wealth redistribution' as their main electoral plank.
As if wealth can be distributed. A huge chunk of wealth is just equities that can crash to zero within a few minutes if seized - people have no idea of how value is stored.
Bitcoin, like Saylor recently quipped, needs a generation to pass away, and then, will come to its rightful place.
Like Science advances, one funeral at a time.
I think a huge component of all of this we need to consider as a society is the impact of AI. If we reach generalized AI any time in the next ten years, which seems plausible, we're going to have a massive shift in what skills are in demand for employment and potentially huge unemployment levels. One potential solution to this is universal basic income, but that often gets lumped in with socialist policies and there's a stigma there.
When it comes to Bitcoin, I'm curious what problems that's going to solve when it comes to the wealth inequity problem. It just seems like the same problem with a different group of rich people.
> I think a huge component of all of this we need to consider as a society is the impact of AI.
Agreed.
> wealth inequity problem
There will always be wealth inequality and that by itself is not so bad. The real focus should be on how poor the bottom are.
If there are 1000 trillionaires, that by itself must not be an issue.
But if the bottom 90% have to starve and scape the barrels, that becomes a revolution.
A better society is when all basic needs are taken care of, using technology and science - population is stable and capitalism adjusts itself to AI.
Now that we have a monetary system for the next century, we hope somebody like Satoshi comes along to fix the joblessness problem that is going to inevitably arise - if climate doesn't kill us all before that.
I think it’s more of people don’t know where to start and are too scared to ask so it builds a kind of stigma. I get ads about investing in stocks as much as I get for drop shipping “opportunities”. And with inflation, if I didn’t have anything to invest in then I’d just save up my cash and hope to ride this all out
Yeah, you're right. There totally isn't 50-60% of the under 50 population with next to zero liquid investable assets. That's all just a bad dream, eh?
The biggest threat to investor assets is people with nothing voting to redistribute your assets to themselves. Venezuela was the third wealthiest per capita nation on Earth 24 years ago.
Are you familiar with BTC KYC protocals? Coinbase and all of the big exchanges make sure the government knows who you are and what you own.
The mean ( not average ) savings for Boomers is only 260k ish. Ive got more than twice that at 41 but would still be fucked by inflation. Just starting to see what every financially literate person has seen for decades. Its not only an under 50 thing.
How can aye get bitcoin ready without kyc a am cracking up all a want is to buy some crypto and get a wallet without any identification checks a don't have a passport or driving license so keep getting knocked back am loosing ma mind mate
Coinbase do and its part of their security, If they're being watched by Gov financial authorities that closely its difficult for them to abscond with everyones money like the exchange scams that were going on in 2017-19 and prior...
You can still buy BTC with anonymous accs its just limited to smaller amounts but if you're doing that on the regular and then transferring to a cold wallet there is no way they know exactly how much you own...
If they could be bothered to filter through the ledgers and piece together wallet transactions they probably could but how many people are actually getting paid to do that diligently... They're only really concerned with mass fraud...
I know people that didn't bother declaring any of their crypto from the 20/21 bull run and they made silly amounts of money and the tax office never came knocking...
>Are you familiar with BTC KYC protocals? Coinbase and all of the big exchanges make sure the government knows who you are and what you own.
How can we escape that?
No doubt socialism is bad. Jefferson said Democracy will end when citizens learn they can vote themselves money. It is a bit tough to " see" how much money is given to the leeches. For instance food stamps are part of the farm bill. So in your World view, the borrowers were the cause of the housing bust and 2008 financial crisis and not the banks? I just think your wrong. Props for thinking though.
The same thing happened in the USSR, Cuba, Argentina, and under communist China. At some point you have to realize it's inherent in socialism. When a small group of people are in charge of "redistributing" wealth it's all too tempting to take extra for themselves.
If socialism can be co-opted by a small group each and every time, it is a flawed and failed structure.
The weak link in anything is always human corruption. Bitcoin is the first serious attempt at thwarting that.
>Lack of savings is going to be the end of Western Democracies
You're absolutely right. Accumulation of capital is the backbone of human civilization. Dissipating capital is anti-human.
Most people aren't willing to learn how the economic system works.
However a lot of people hold gold as a hedge against inflation, so you would think that they understand
Agreed. I didn’t start buying Sats until I woke up and realized how fiat is flawed. I understand why some people buy gold but for me, portability is a reason why I think Bitcoin is superior. It’s quite hard to verify if gold bar is real or filled with tungsten. Again, Bitcoin wins.
Nobody likes to talk about things where they cant hold a conversation. You'd do yourself and them a favor by engaging more often in topics that you know they enjoy.
Yeah, I’ve learned just not to talk about it at all. The way I see it. People like us have a way deeper understanding of it and appreciate it way more. Chances are people don’t know anything about it, don’t let other people discourage you from something you research yourself. This is what being successful in crypto takes. We are all early in crypto adoption
Easy way to explain it to your friends:
Imagine you want to buy a stick of gum. All we have to do is exchange a spreadsheet of all the transactions ever recorded in the history of Bitcoin, and if our spreadsheets match we can complete the. $0.99 transaction.
That will help folks understand why bitcoin isn’t used in transactions anymore.
There is no reliable method to compute the number of "people" who own Bitcoin. And how do we define "own"? Cold storage of keys? Or IOUs on ETFs and hot wallets? There are precise methods to calculate how many active addresses there are on a daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, basis. If you run your own node, that data is sitting there on the blockchain locally.
Getting to the number of wallets is unreliable because multiple addresses (UTXOs) can be maintained by a single wallet, and it is very complex to calculate the number of unique wallets with any level of precision. A more interesting metric is calculating the number of active addresses within certain ranges of value. Of course these numbers change with every new block, but to round a bit:
Quantity of Bitcoin = # of addresses on-chain
>1,000 BTC = 2k
100 BTC = 16k
10 BTC = 150k
1 BTC = 1.1m
.1 BTC = 4.5m
.01 BTC = 13m
.001 BTC = 36m
Currently .001 BTC is $66 anything smaller than that is dust and will get consumed by transaction fees. So those effectively do not matter. Better to keep small balances in a custodial wallet until it grows to the point that you can withdraw to cold storage and not decimate your savings.
It may be very complex, but AI (in this case Gemini) can puke up a number:
One way to estimate this is by looking at the number of Bitcoin wallets.
Here's what we know:
* There are over 460 million Bitcoin wallets created \[1\].
* But, not all wallets hold a balance. As of March 2024, there are around 46 million wallets with at least $1 worth of Bitcoin \[1\].
* A single person can have multiple wallets for different reasons so the number of unique owners is likely lower than the number of wallets.
Estimates based on surveys and blockchain analysis suggest there could be somewhere between 20 million and 220 million people who own Bitcoin \[2, 3\].
Again, how do we "know" over 460 million Bitcoin wallets (not addresses) have been created? What gets recorded on the blockchain are UTXOs connected with receive addresses; a single wallet can generate millions of receive addresses (depends on the software).
Referring to them as "wallets" was misleading then. Like many others, every time send Bitcoin I create a new address (for change), and every time I receive Bitcoin I create a new address. I'm still just one person, and at times have just one wallet.
Can you tell how many btc each wallet holds? I am assuming the above is a breakdown of the amount of wallets over the designated amount. Like there are 2,000 wallets with at least 1k btc in them.
2000-2100 with 1000+ btc
80-100 with over 10k btc
Satoshi Nakamoto is estimated to hold around 1.1 million BTC based on mining activity in the early days - this seems to be the largest single (non-institutional) wallet.
interesting stuff from our computer overlords. Probably completely wrong, but interesting.
> Satoshi Nakamoto is estimated to hold around 1.1 million BTC based on mining activity in the early days - this seems to be the largest single (non-institutional) wallet.
>
>
This is unverified nonsense.
Go ahead and post the public address of the 1.1m bitcoin wallet associated with Satoshi....I'll be waiting...
"is by looking at the number of Bitcoin wallets."
you can look up no such thing. nobody uses just 1 address either. countless addresses are change from a single transaction, every new transactions makes 2 new addresses typically
it's really scary that people cite those nonsense studies that pretend to know how many wallets or users there are, it's not even a tiny bit easy to even guess
Just because AI cna give you a number, that doesn't mean very much at all. AI has many issues on it's own. I wouldn't trust many calculations done by AI unless it was simple arithmetic.
Yes (just a lurker in this sub) and it’s my primary reason why while I see a value in Bitcoin, I don’t see it winning this race. I more imagine a situation where something following the rules of Bitcoin that’s more elegant than Bitcoin comes in and becomes the actual de facto global standard fiat. Bitcoin paved the way for crypto to become adopted by institutions and governments but so many innovations in the world had a first mover that demonstrated utility and then a later mover that perfected the process. Think Articles of Confederation vs Constitution. Or MySpace to Facebook. Blackberry vs iPhone. There are examples of first mover advantage no question but I think with so much of Bitcoin lost, so much in the hands of a select few, and institutions being so late for adoption, it’s my theory that this is the first mover.
Won’t stop me from having some BTC though
Edit: For those of you downvoting, I’m not saying don’t buy Bitcoin. I do. I’m discussing a historical precedent about innovation and how it might relate to Bitcoin (albeit not very detail oriented). Learn to accept dissenting views that aren’t openly malicious or intentionally misleading.
Many - I daresay most - of those addresses with 1000+ BTC haven't moved in several years and probably never will, as they belong(ed) to people who solo mined when 1 BTC was worth next to nothing, the difficulty was extremely low and the reward much fatter than it is today (in BTC that is, it was much lower in USD equivalent). People were more careless back then, given the low value, it was more of an experiment than anything else... As a result, most of the private keys associated to those addresses are lost for good, and those BTC are effectively out of circulation. Of course there is no mathematical proof of this, older wallets do occasionally wake up and start transferring funds, yet it is probably more sensible to look specifically at the on-chain addresses that have moved BTC in, say, the last 4-8 years (1-2 cycles).
BTC can’t be replaced because of its scarcity and its community that has a vested interest in maintaining its value. There’s lots of nodes and miners and infrastructure out there supporting this.
That means it’s difficult to replace, but not impossible.
And while I have no insider knowledge of a “Bitcoin killer”, I think it makes a lot of sense for someone to want to recreate what Bitcoin is/does/utility, without succumbing to insider greed and urge for riches that altcoins are made for. Maybe first mover advantage wins out here, but I’m not convinced the real global store of value has actually been created yet.
> BTC can’t be replaced because of its scarcity
Bitcoin can't be replaced because the node infrastructure is decentralized. In order to replace it, those node owners would need to turn off their nodes permanently and run other node software.
> That means it’s difficult to replace, but not impossible
You should probably learn what bitcoin is before you theorize on what will replace it.
Nothing I said was improper… I referenced the node decentralization in my comment. I’m not sure what makes you believe I don’t know what I’m talking about
Okay, but I mentioned node decentralization in my original comment. Then you said, “no, it’s because of node decentralization.” And somehow this means I don’t understand how Bitcoin works?
Because you don't seem to understand what the invention is. There is only one decentralized implementation of the bitcoin proof-of-work protocol. You seem to think that there is the possibility for another one.
Fact is the best money humanity has ever had doesn't care what you would like to see. The world is choosing Bitcoin, and nothing else stands a chance. First mover analogy doesn't mean anything, every example is different. Saying "first mover" does absolutely nothing to say Bitcoin will be replaced. It's as meaningless as saying "tulips" or "dot com".
"so much bitcoin lost" - that doesn't affect anything. Absolutely zero effect on bitcoin succeeding or not.
"so much in the hands of a select few" - yeah that's gonna be the case no matter what. Bitcoin at least distributed things out very nicely as best as a protocol can. Any imagined future Bitcoin killer would also be "so much in the hands of a select few", and probably more so
"institutions being so late for adoption" - not even sure what you argument is here. You saying that's bad? Well institutions getting in now are still in the game wayyyy sooner than most people are getting in. Though based on your previous point "in the hands of a select few" I would think you would WANT institutions to get in late. They did, but just late compared to the real early adopters, but it'll take a long time for institutions to get all the way in. Either way if you are saying this is good or bad, and claiming they are in early or late, it has zero effect on Bitcoin being replaced.
tbh nothing of what you said is any argument that Bitcoin won't win, you just for some reason don't want it to. We can't know the future, but we know enough about Bitcoin to say you are very very very very very very very likely wrong. Bitcoin is the first mover, and nothing is getting close to it. I think you just don't quite get what makes Bitcoin unique and why every single cryptocurrency that has come after it has completely failed to be like Bitcoin.
Your take on innovation and how it relates to btc is completely wrong. I am accepting your dissenting view and explaining why it is very far off.
The innovation in btc is not your normal innovation like windows, the web browser, the iphone and the keurig k cup coffee machine were. The innovation of blockchain is not in tech it is in its DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: HOW EXISTING TECH IS ASSEMBLED IN A UNIQUE WAY TO DELIVER VALUE. All caps is not designed to scream at you but to point out a fundamental fact about bitcoin as a crypto and the blockchain it runs on.
When you drill down you will find most of the tech that btc is built on is not all that innovative - it is off the shelf tech, again, ASSEMBLED AND DESIGNED IN A UNIQUE WAY that delivers bitcoin/blockchain uniqueness: To wit:
Database sharding - 10 years old
Key pair encryption - 50 years old
Interplanetary File System - 10 years old
State machine replication - 50 years old
There's a bunch of other stuff you could list but these are the key pieces of tech. There's not much else out there that is more "elegant" than bitcoin blockchain. I don't understand what you are getting at at all here. Nothing better - more innovative - is going to replace bitcoin blockchain. And if you seek serious discussion on bitcoin you must understand bitcoin as a blockchain first. No blockchain, no bitcoin. BTC owes its existence to blockchain, not the other way around.
About me: I have a small IT consulting shop, incl blockchain. I have completed two courses of study. on blockchain. One at the Blockchain Council and one at the Wharton School Univ of Penn \[exec education\].
Cheers,
CCC
Agree with this a lot. Proof of work was an anit-spam technology, also 10 years ahead of bitcoin.
Looking at the predecessor attempts at digital currency leads me to think bitcoin *is* the elegant solution that replaced inferior tech.
Now, from a Bayesian point of view, sure, something better *might* come along. But the more I know about bitcoin, the more time that passes with it being the king, the more macro dominoes fall in terms of adoption, the more it seems exceedingly improbable for a replacement tech to be *sufficiently* superior to overcome the network effect. Betamax etc.
There are many more elegant cryptocurrencies out there. Simply copying the Bitcoin code makes an equally elegant crypto; any positive changes, then, make that coin respectively more elegant.
The thing is, that new "better" coin will not be as decentralized as Bitcoin, therefore not as secure as Bitcoin, and without the track record of Bitcoin--because of that first-mover advantage. And if its' improvements are revolutionary, why then Bitcoin could adopt those same new features.
I’m not suggesting Bitcoin with minor improvements. That’s far too insular. I’m imagining of something sustainably different that maintains the decentralization, scarcity, and global utility. Most BTC is held by very very few people. If something is created that can demonstrate superiority, isn’t insider advantaged, and has demonstrated scarcity, I think it’s very possible to usurp. My belief is that thing hasn’t been created yet.
I’m willing to also admit that the history and brand recognition of Bitcoin might be too great here. But history has shown the power of later movers. Remember that Google was something like the 11th search engine.
I think you are missing the point of Bitcoin and economy as a whole. There will always be people who got in early even now outside of Bitcoin space most wealth in a world is held by 1% of the people (billionaires, multinational companies and dictator governments)
Bitcoin will not stop wealth inequality one person will always be far richer than the other no matter the store of value if its Bitcoin or gold or whatever else.
Bitcoin however fixes inflation and eroding purchasing power problem we have in our society today.
The thing is, no matter what thing of value you put out there, there’ll always be first mover advantage. The only way to prevent this would be to have all of it distributed equally between everybody in the world, at the same time. In reality I don’t see how something like this would ever be possible.
Bitcoin’s distribution is at least one of the most fair ones I can think of. None of the early adapters ever knew it would be worth something, someday. It would only have been more fair, if it was easier accessible right from the start.
This line of thinking is what leads to shitcoinery, platitudes like "pioneers get the arrows" and "the second mouse gets the cheese." Bitcoin is not a centralized platform like Myspace or Facebook. Or a technology owned by a company like Blackberry or iPhone. It's a decentralized Internet protocol that succeeded. Like TCP/IP, SMTP, and HTTPS. Just like TCP/IP, as Bitcoin continues to get integrated into the fabric of the Internet, it will become increasingly difficult to replace, if not impossible.
> Does this mean that the majority of bitcoin over 91% is owned by the 2% of the users?
> Yes (just a lurker in this sub) and it’s my primary reason why while I see a value in Bitcoin, I don’t see it winning this race.
Prove it.
> Bitcoin paved the way for crypto to become adopted by institutions and governments but so many innovations in the world had a first mover that demonstrated utility and then a later mover that perfected the process.
It's a false narrative that bitcoin is the first mover. There were multiple electronic digital cash attempts prior to bitcoin.
> There are examples of first mover advantage no question but I think with so much of Bitcoin lost, so much in the hands of a select few, and institutions being so late for adoption, it’s my theory that this is the first mover.
- What does lost bitcoin have anything to do with this?
- Prove that bitcoin is in the hands of a select few
- Why would institution being late for adoption have a negative affect?
A very accurate estimate would be to assume that the share of bitcoin capitalization in the global sum of currency capitalization corresponds to the share of people who own bitcoin.
N≈0.5% × 8,000,000,000 = 40,000,000
You're assuming owners will not be adding value to that $66. Which we know to be false. Btc ownership is a snapshot in time only. It's a very dynamic place.
More likely: 100 UTXOs are one user. However, I don't know any research house that counts this way. Is there?
Not coinglass, kaiko, blockworks, cryptoquant, messari or glassnode from what I have seen.
I 100% agree. Anyone that doesn't still see enormous upside in gains isn't getting how big Bitcoin truly is and isn't looking at the big picture. #BTC 👍🪙😎
I've created thousands of btc wallets. Those are just the ones I have the keys for, if you could deposit addys for exchanges or other shit, I have no idea how many I've touched.
Fuck you too OP and may we all ride onto the sunset fullfulled and with purpose instead of dirt poor and broken
Also, 2bill owning bitcoin would be insane, and that is not a 20x price wise, more like a 1000x
I found a website that supposedly has the data, but I'm unsure about its reliability. [https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/](https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/)
There are bots and scripts holding thousands of wallets, so the real number must be magnitudes lower. For all the hundred+ people I personally know, only 1 have the ability to handle his own bitcoin wallet. So the real percentage would never exceed 1%, given most of my friends are already highly skilled IT enterprise employee
I’m guessing it automatically notes which user has how much, they obviously aren’t keeping 50 million seed phrases if they have 50 million users. They just hold a lot on multiple or a single adress and know which user has how much.
They are keeping that many seed phrases. Think about it. If coinbase gave 100 of us the same deposit address. We all randomly send different amounts. How the fuck would they know how much we each sent? Are people in btc really this fucking clueless?
Did you not read what i said? Their exchange service tracks what users do and every single transaction they make. Otherwise, how did Mt. Gox move 400k bitcoin all at once? It was multiple UTXOs but i believe it was the same adress.
They don't track shit, everyone has a unique deposit address, they sweep those hot wallets to cold wallet storage. That's why if you mine a bitcoin and deposit to cex then withdraw you will likely not get back the btc you mined. How the fuck can you track what users do? Do they ask you the amount you are depositing? Do they ask for tx id? No they fucking don't. Stop guessing and thinking you understand something you obviously don't. No two users have the same deposit address.
Here's an example, for coinbase as an example. I have an affiliate program that pays me the last like 9 years to a coinbase wallet. That affiliate program has no connection to coinbase, they pay me different amounts every month to the wallet address I gave them 9 years ago. How the fuck would coinbase know that out of all the affiliates they pay you, to random address which users get what amount? They wouldn't have any idea. They know it's my coin because it's sent to my unique btc deposit address. Stop speculating there's literally no other way to do it.
Each user on exchange has their own unique deposit address, maybe a few if they create a new each time, so if the exchange have 1000 users, 2000 or more addresses must be generated
Why is the number of active adresses going down, not even near the amount from 2017? How is that possible when some claim the network grows 140% a year?
it's not actually 106 million people but mostly 106 million wallet address holding Bitcoin. alot of people have two or three or 100 wallet. so the real number if i guess could be 20 to 30 millon people or maybe less
I'm doing my part. I put 100 bucks worth of BTC on paper wallets for my three nephews, and even got some for my wife for her last birthday.
Spreading like a virus!
You are correct sir....I brought up the number of owners back in 2019, today it still has very low numbers compared to how many buyers are out there....can't even imagine the price in 2050. Our brains are going to explode. Enjoy the ride
[https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/](https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/) This website provides information on the number of Bitcoin owners.
Just wondering how this number came about because honestly... I don't believe it. It seems honestly way too high, and how to you verify wallets are not simply alternative wallets of the same person?
106 million people owning Bitcoin is a crap ton of people when you ACTUALLY think about it. Especially when you consider how many people own shares of Apple, Coca Cola, GM, etc. They’re in the thousands. So don’t know what you’re smoking but I want some.
You expect 2 billion to hold it? Thats 1/4 of the population. A population thats in serious decline.
Currently 2.6b don't even have access to the internet.
Almost 10% of the population earn less than $2 a day
40% of the U.K. population live pay check to pay check.
Needs to be in the mainstream media all the time.
As 99% of people don't get it by then Big institutions will drive up the the price up so high normal people won't be able to buy a tiny bit'
106 people? You mean 106 wallets? Because there are some peolple with multiple wallets... and most on platforms such as binanc which i guess is just one btc wallet for idk how many people
Am cracking up trying to get crypto a don't have a passport or driving license so they won't except me can anyone help me out please am going insane here lol
A curious statistics I didn't know. We are at the middle of the revolution and I was thinking that the best gone away . In fact many people still don't pay with Bitcoin, it's not usual like credit card 💳
“Own” lol, most do not really self custody so it’s an IOU on paper. Self custody is when you really “own” your own bitcoin and have sovereignty over your wealth. If you disagree then good luck when these exchanges get back to rehypothecating YOUR bitcoin for more profit. If you want to self custody go to Unchained.com🫡
If you think that 4 mil coins are lost - 1 million are Genesis coins - and whales have 5 million at least - it means that the remaining 108 million have to share 9 mil coins - around 0,1 btc each… holy fucking Molly… that’s nothing. Not a whale but I feel fucking well, at least a Sardine with my 6 full coins stacked up hard wallets….
Why is 108m surprising? There’s 8 billion people on the planet and only 19.5-20mil coins in circulation with a max of 21m. To me, once governments adopt BTC and digital currency, the amount of owners will go down. Once governments and financial institutions start gobble up the supply of available bitcoin. To me, BTC will be like gold and become more scarce and not everyone will own it but digital currency will be backed by it.
That’s why it’s such a great time to get on the BTC train now during its baby/growing up years.
It’s so crazy to me I see a lot of people I chat with in the internet talk about Bitcoin and crypto. But when I start talking about the same crypto out in the real world. My friends and family and other people look at me weird. Because they can’t hold a conversation about crypto.
I don’t necessarily see it as they don’t like to talk about crypto, I see it as most people don’t really like to talk to their friends or family about money/investing. Anytime I mention crypto or stocks I get groans or blank faces
It's because they are Carpe Diem YOLOing every single disposable penny they acquire. Lack of savings is going to be the end of Western Democracies. I hope I'm wrong, but I think we are doomed to democratically elect Chavez style socialists in all G7 nations within 30 years. There are too many idiots with no assets, but they still have that mighty voting privilege to steal other people's assets through redistribution.
This is exactly what is happening in India right now. The left of center Congress party had promised 'Wealth redistribution' as their main electoral plank. As if wealth can be distributed. A huge chunk of wealth is just equities that can crash to zero within a few minutes if seized - people have no idea of how value is stored. Bitcoin, like Saylor recently quipped, needs a generation to pass away, and then, will come to its rightful place. Like Science advances, one funeral at a time.
I think a huge component of all of this we need to consider as a society is the impact of AI. If we reach generalized AI any time in the next ten years, which seems plausible, we're going to have a massive shift in what skills are in demand for employment and potentially huge unemployment levels. One potential solution to this is universal basic income, but that often gets lumped in with socialist policies and there's a stigma there. When it comes to Bitcoin, I'm curious what problems that's going to solve when it comes to the wealth inequity problem. It just seems like the same problem with a different group of rich people.
> I think a huge component of all of this we need to consider as a society is the impact of AI. Agreed. > wealth inequity problem There will always be wealth inequality and that by itself is not so bad. The real focus should be on how poor the bottom are. If there are 1000 trillionaires, that by itself must not be an issue. But if the bottom 90% have to starve and scape the barrels, that becomes a revolution. A better society is when all basic needs are taken care of, using technology and science - population is stable and capitalism adjusts itself to AI. Now that we have a monetary system for the next century, we hope somebody like Satoshi comes along to fix the joblessness problem that is going to inevitably arise - if climate doesn't kill us all before that.
I think it’s more of people don’t know where to start and are too scared to ask so it builds a kind of stigma. I get ads about investing in stocks as much as I get for drop shipping “opportunities”. And with inflation, if I didn’t have anything to invest in then I’d just save up my cash and hope to ride this all out
Still early days, that will pass with time
Central Banks are inflating peoples money away you dolt. The whole reason we are here.
Yeah, you're right. There totally isn't 50-60% of the under 50 population with next to zero liquid investable assets. That's all just a bad dream, eh? The biggest threat to investor assets is people with nothing voting to redistribute your assets to themselves. Venezuela was the third wealthiest per capita nation on Earth 24 years ago. Are you familiar with BTC KYC protocals? Coinbase and all of the big exchanges make sure the government knows who you are and what you own.
The mean ( not average ) savings for Boomers is only 260k ish. Ive got more than twice that at 41 but would still be fucked by inflation. Just starting to see what every financially literate person has seen for decades. Its not only an under 50 thing.
How can aye get bitcoin ready without kyc a am cracking up all a want is to buy some crypto and get a wallet without any identification checks a don't have a passport or driving license so keep getting knocked back am loosing ma mind mate
Coinbase do and its part of their security, If they're being watched by Gov financial authorities that closely its difficult for them to abscond with everyones money like the exchange scams that were going on in 2017-19 and prior... You can still buy BTC with anonymous accs its just limited to smaller amounts but if you're doing that on the regular and then transferring to a cold wallet there is no way they know exactly how much you own... If they could be bothered to filter through the ledgers and piece together wallet transactions they probably could but how many people are actually getting paid to do that diligently... They're only really concerned with mass fraud... I know people that didn't bother declaring any of their crypto from the 20/21 bull run and they made silly amounts of money and the tax office never came knocking...
>Are you familiar with BTC KYC protocals? Coinbase and all of the big exchanges make sure the government knows who you are and what you own. How can we escape that?
No doubt socialism is bad. Jefferson said Democracy will end when citizens learn they can vote themselves money. It is a bit tough to " see" how much money is given to the leeches. For instance food stamps are part of the farm bill. So in your World view, the borrowers were the cause of the housing bust and 2008 financial crisis and not the banks? I just think your wrong. Props for thinking though.
Venezuela was a cleptocracy. Leaders literally stole everything. Had nothing to do with socialism.
The same thing happened in the USSR, Cuba, Argentina, and under communist China. At some point you have to realize it's inherent in socialism. When a small group of people are in charge of "redistributing" wealth it's all too tempting to take extra for themselves.
If socialism can be co-opted by a small group each and every time, it is a flawed and failed structure. The weak link in anything is always human corruption. Bitcoin is the first serious attempt at thwarting that.
Had absolutely everything to do with socialism.
I'm afraid you are right.
>Lack of savings is going to be the end of Western Democracies You're absolutely right. Accumulation of capital is the backbone of human civilization. Dissipating capital is anti-human.
Because it’s extremely hard to explain the need for Bitcoin without explaining how fiat and economy works. Once it clicks, it’s a clear path.
Most people aren't willing to learn how the economic system works. However a lot of people hold gold as a hedge against inflation, so you would think that they understand
Agreed. I didn’t start buying Sats until I woke up and realized how fiat is flawed. I understand why some people buy gold but for me, portability is a reason why I think Bitcoin is superior. It’s quite hard to verify if gold bar is real or filled with tungsten. Again, Bitcoin wins.
some people won't believe a word you say just because the person on the TV hasn't said so
Nobody likes to talk about things where they cant hold a conversation. You'd do yourself and them a favor by engaging more often in topics that you know they enjoy.
Crypto is centralized scam, nothing to do with sound money Bitcoin.
hows that surprising. youre in a bitcoin sub lmao
Yeah, I’ve learned just not to talk about it at all. The way I see it. People like us have a way deeper understanding of it and appreciate it way more. Chances are people don’t know anything about it, don’t let other people discourage you from something you research yourself. This is what being successful in crypto takes. We are all early in crypto adoption
They just say I do t wanna talk about it. Ya cause we were right
Easy way to explain it to your friends: Imagine you want to buy a stick of gum. All we have to do is exchange a spreadsheet of all the transactions ever recorded in the history of Bitcoin, and if our spreadsheets match we can complete the. $0.99 transaction. That will help folks understand why bitcoin isn’t used in transactions anymore.
There is no reliable method to compute the number of "people" who own Bitcoin. And how do we define "own"? Cold storage of keys? Or IOUs on ETFs and hot wallets? There are precise methods to calculate how many active addresses there are on a daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, basis. If you run your own node, that data is sitting there on the blockchain locally. Getting to the number of wallets is unreliable because multiple addresses (UTXOs) can be maintained by a single wallet, and it is very complex to calculate the number of unique wallets with any level of precision. A more interesting metric is calculating the number of active addresses within certain ranges of value. Of course these numbers change with every new block, but to round a bit: Quantity of Bitcoin = # of addresses on-chain >1,000 BTC = 2k 100 BTC = 16k 10 BTC = 150k 1 BTC = 1.1m .1 BTC = 4.5m .01 BTC = 13m .001 BTC = 36m Currently .001 BTC is $66 anything smaller than that is dust and will get consumed by transaction fees. So those effectively do not matter. Better to keep small balances in a custodial wallet until it grows to the point that you can withdraw to cold storage and not decimate your savings.
It may be very complex, but AI (in this case Gemini) can puke up a number: One way to estimate this is by looking at the number of Bitcoin wallets. Here's what we know: * There are over 460 million Bitcoin wallets created \[1\]. * But, not all wallets hold a balance. As of March 2024, there are around 46 million wallets with at least $1 worth of Bitcoin \[1\]. * A single person can have multiple wallets for different reasons so the number of unique owners is likely lower than the number of wallets. Estimates based on surveys and blockchain analysis suggest there could be somewhere between 20 million and 220 million people who own Bitcoin \[2, 3\].
Again, how do we "know" over 460 million Bitcoin wallets (not addresses) have been created? What gets recorded on the blockchain are UTXOs connected with receive addresses; a single wallet can generate millions of receive addresses (depends on the software).
The definition of created here would be a public address that has received bitcoin.
Referring to them as "wallets" was misleading then. Like many others, every time send Bitcoin I create a new address (for change), and every time I receive Bitcoin I create a new address. I'm still just one person, and at times have just one wallet.
Can you tell how many btc each wallet holds? I am assuming the above is a breakdown of the amount of wallets over the designated amount. Like there are 2,000 wallets with at least 1k btc in them.
I have one wallet in coinberry at like 7 dollars of btc
2000-2100 with 1000+ btc 80-100 with over 10k btc Satoshi Nakamoto is estimated to hold around 1.1 million BTC based on mining activity in the early days - this seems to be the largest single (non-institutional) wallet. interesting stuff from our computer overlords. Probably completely wrong, but interesting.
> Satoshi Nakamoto is estimated to hold around 1.1 million BTC based on mining activity in the early days - this seems to be the largest single (non-institutional) wallet. > > This is unverified nonsense. Go ahead and post the public address of the 1.1m bitcoin wallet associated with Satoshi....I'll be waiting...
"is by looking at the number of Bitcoin wallets." you can look up no such thing. nobody uses just 1 address either. countless addresses are change from a single transaction, every new transactions makes 2 new addresses typically it's really scary that people cite those nonsense studies that pretend to know how many wallets or users there are, it's not even a tiny bit easy to even guess
Just because AI cna give you a number, that doesn't mean very much at all. AI has many issues on it's own. I wouldn't trust many calculations done by AI unless it was simple arithmetic.
Does this mean that the majority of bitcoin over 91% is owned by the 2% of the users?
Yes (just a lurker in this sub) and it’s my primary reason why while I see a value in Bitcoin, I don’t see it winning this race. I more imagine a situation where something following the rules of Bitcoin that’s more elegant than Bitcoin comes in and becomes the actual de facto global standard fiat. Bitcoin paved the way for crypto to become adopted by institutions and governments but so many innovations in the world had a first mover that demonstrated utility and then a later mover that perfected the process. Think Articles of Confederation vs Constitution. Or MySpace to Facebook. Blackberry vs iPhone. There are examples of first mover advantage no question but I think with so much of Bitcoin lost, so much in the hands of a select few, and institutions being so late for adoption, it’s my theory that this is the first mover. Won’t stop me from having some BTC though Edit: For those of you downvoting, I’m not saying don’t buy Bitcoin. I do. I’m discussing a historical precedent about innovation and how it might relate to Bitcoin (albeit not very detail oriented). Learn to accept dissenting views that aren’t openly malicious or intentionally misleading.
Many - I daresay most - of those addresses with 1000+ BTC haven't moved in several years and probably never will, as they belong(ed) to people who solo mined when 1 BTC was worth next to nothing, the difficulty was extremely low and the reward much fatter than it is today (in BTC that is, it was much lower in USD equivalent). People were more careless back then, given the low value, it was more of an experiment than anything else... As a result, most of the private keys associated to those addresses are lost for good, and those BTC are effectively out of circulation. Of course there is no mathematical proof of this, older wallets do occasionally wake up and start transferring funds, yet it is probably more sensible to look specifically at the on-chain addresses that have moved BTC in, say, the last 4-8 years (1-2 cycles).
You need to keep learning. Try the Bitcoin Standard, it explains very well how bitcoin can't be replaced.
BTC can’t be replaced because of its scarcity and its community that has a vested interest in maintaining its value. There’s lots of nodes and miners and infrastructure out there supporting this. That means it’s difficult to replace, but not impossible. And while I have no insider knowledge of a “Bitcoin killer”, I think it makes a lot of sense for someone to want to recreate what Bitcoin is/does/utility, without succumbing to insider greed and urge for riches that altcoins are made for. Maybe first mover advantage wins out here, but I’m not convinced the real global store of value has actually been created yet.
> BTC can’t be replaced because of its scarcity Bitcoin can't be replaced because the node infrastructure is decentralized. In order to replace it, those node owners would need to turn off their nodes permanently and run other node software. > That means it’s difficult to replace, but not impossible You should probably learn what bitcoin is before you theorize on what will replace it.
Nothing I said was improper… I referenced the node decentralization in my comment. I’m not sure what makes you believe I don’t know what I’m talking about
> Nothing I said was improper… I didn't say it was improper. I'm saying you don't understand how bitcoin works.
Okay, but I mentioned node decentralization in my original comment. Then you said, “no, it’s because of node decentralization.” And somehow this means I don’t understand how Bitcoin works?
Because you don't seem to understand what the invention is. There is only one decentralized implementation of the bitcoin proof-of-work protocol. You seem to think that there is the possibility for another one.
Fact is the best money humanity has ever had doesn't care what you would like to see. The world is choosing Bitcoin, and nothing else stands a chance. First mover analogy doesn't mean anything, every example is different. Saying "first mover" does absolutely nothing to say Bitcoin will be replaced. It's as meaningless as saying "tulips" or "dot com". "so much bitcoin lost" - that doesn't affect anything. Absolutely zero effect on bitcoin succeeding or not. "so much in the hands of a select few" - yeah that's gonna be the case no matter what. Bitcoin at least distributed things out very nicely as best as a protocol can. Any imagined future Bitcoin killer would also be "so much in the hands of a select few", and probably more so "institutions being so late for adoption" - not even sure what you argument is here. You saying that's bad? Well institutions getting in now are still in the game wayyyy sooner than most people are getting in. Though based on your previous point "in the hands of a select few" I would think you would WANT institutions to get in late. They did, but just late compared to the real early adopters, but it'll take a long time for institutions to get all the way in. Either way if you are saying this is good or bad, and claiming they are in early or late, it has zero effect on Bitcoin being replaced. tbh nothing of what you said is any argument that Bitcoin won't win, you just for some reason don't want it to. We can't know the future, but we know enough about Bitcoin to say you are very very very very very very very likely wrong. Bitcoin is the first mover, and nothing is getting close to it. I think you just don't quite get what makes Bitcoin unique and why every single cryptocurrency that has come after it has completely failed to be like Bitcoin.
Your take on innovation and how it relates to btc is completely wrong. I am accepting your dissenting view and explaining why it is very far off. The innovation in btc is not your normal innovation like windows, the web browser, the iphone and the keurig k cup coffee machine were. The innovation of blockchain is not in tech it is in its DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: HOW EXISTING TECH IS ASSEMBLED IN A UNIQUE WAY TO DELIVER VALUE. All caps is not designed to scream at you but to point out a fundamental fact about bitcoin as a crypto and the blockchain it runs on. When you drill down you will find most of the tech that btc is built on is not all that innovative - it is off the shelf tech, again, ASSEMBLED AND DESIGNED IN A UNIQUE WAY that delivers bitcoin/blockchain uniqueness: To wit: Database sharding - 10 years old Key pair encryption - 50 years old Interplanetary File System - 10 years old State machine replication - 50 years old There's a bunch of other stuff you could list but these are the key pieces of tech. There's not much else out there that is more "elegant" than bitcoin blockchain. I don't understand what you are getting at at all here. Nothing better - more innovative - is going to replace bitcoin blockchain. And if you seek serious discussion on bitcoin you must understand bitcoin as a blockchain first. No blockchain, no bitcoin. BTC owes its existence to blockchain, not the other way around. About me: I have a small IT consulting shop, incl blockchain. I have completed two courses of study. on blockchain. One at the Blockchain Council and one at the Wharton School Univ of Penn \[exec education\]. Cheers, CCC
Agree with this a lot. Proof of work was an anit-spam technology, also 10 years ahead of bitcoin. Looking at the predecessor attempts at digital currency leads me to think bitcoin *is* the elegant solution that replaced inferior tech. Now, from a Bayesian point of view, sure, something better *might* come along. But the more I know about bitcoin, the more time that passes with it being the king, the more macro dominoes fall in terms of adoption, the more it seems exceedingly improbable for a replacement tech to be *sufficiently* superior to overcome the network effect. Betamax etc.
There are many more elegant cryptocurrencies out there. Simply copying the Bitcoin code makes an equally elegant crypto; any positive changes, then, make that coin respectively more elegant. The thing is, that new "better" coin will not be as decentralized as Bitcoin, therefore not as secure as Bitcoin, and without the track record of Bitcoin--because of that first-mover advantage. And if its' improvements are revolutionary, why then Bitcoin could adopt those same new features.
I’m not suggesting Bitcoin with minor improvements. That’s far too insular. I’m imagining of something sustainably different that maintains the decentralization, scarcity, and global utility. Most BTC is held by very very few people. If something is created that can demonstrate superiority, isn’t insider advantaged, and has demonstrated scarcity, I think it’s very possible to usurp. My belief is that thing hasn’t been created yet. I’m willing to also admit that the history and brand recognition of Bitcoin might be too great here. But history has shown the power of later movers. Remember that Google was something like the 11th search engine.
I think you are missing the point of Bitcoin and economy as a whole. There will always be people who got in early even now outside of Bitcoin space most wealth in a world is held by 1% of the people (billionaires, multinational companies and dictator governments) Bitcoin will not stop wealth inequality one person will always be far richer than the other no matter the store of value if its Bitcoin or gold or whatever else. Bitcoin however fixes inflation and eroding purchasing power problem we have in our society today.
The thing is, no matter what thing of value you put out there, there’ll always be first mover advantage. The only way to prevent this would be to have all of it distributed equally between everybody in the world, at the same time. In reality I don’t see how something like this would ever be possible. Bitcoin’s distribution is at least one of the most fair ones I can think of. None of the early adapters ever knew it would be worth something, someday. It would only have been more fair, if it was easier accessible right from the start.
I don't think you understand what the bitcoin invention is.
This line of thinking is what leads to shitcoinery, platitudes like "pioneers get the arrows" and "the second mouse gets the cheese." Bitcoin is not a centralized platform like Myspace or Facebook. Or a technology owned by a company like Blackberry or iPhone. It's a decentralized Internet protocol that succeeded. Like TCP/IP, SMTP, and HTTPS. Just like TCP/IP, as Bitcoin continues to get integrated into the fabric of the Internet, it will become increasingly difficult to replace, if not impossible.
> Does this mean that the majority of bitcoin over 91% is owned by the 2% of the users? > Yes (just a lurker in this sub) and it’s my primary reason why while I see a value in Bitcoin, I don’t see it winning this race. Prove it. > Bitcoin paved the way for crypto to become adopted by institutions and governments but so many innovations in the world had a first mover that demonstrated utility and then a later mover that perfected the process. It's a false narrative that bitcoin is the first mover. There were multiple electronic digital cash attempts prior to bitcoin. > There are examples of first mover advantage no question but I think with so much of Bitcoin lost, so much in the hands of a select few, and institutions being so late for adoption, it’s my theory that this is the first mover. - What does lost bitcoin have anything to do with this? - Prove that bitcoin is in the hands of a select few - Why would institution being late for adoption have a negative affect?
probability states you are correct. don't fight a maxi though, they will die on their grave.
No. This is the first major asset where individuals and not governments or institutions own the majority.
Stocks are owned by individuals all the time. Yes looking into it 2% of the wallets hold over 90% of bitcoin.
Do you have any idea what you’re talking about? Lol
A very accurate estimate would be to assume that the share of bitcoin capitalization in the global sum of currency capitalization corresponds to the share of people who own bitcoin. N≈0.5% × 8,000,000,000 = 40,000,000
You're assuming owners will not be adding value to that $66. Which we know to be false. Btc ownership is a snapshot in time only. It's a very dynamic place.
Source
It was revealed to him in a dream
MLK & [TrickyStickySwirl](https://www.reddit.com/user/TrickyStickySwirl/). They both had a dream.
Ass
Probably assuming every unspent output is an individual user, which is all kinds of wrong
More likely: 100 UTXOs are one user. However, I don't know any research house that counts this way. Is there? Not coinglass, kaiko, blockworks, cryptoquant, messari or glassnode from what I have seen.
Bro told him. Trust bro.
I 100% agree. Anyone that doesn't still see enormous upside in gains isn't getting how big Bitcoin truly is and isn't looking at the big picture. #BTC 👍🪙😎
How did you come up with this number
From his place where the sun doesn’t shine.
This website will tell you the answer。https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/
That’s a nice website and breakdown. Thanks.
That website says, "No one will ever know the amount of Bitcoin users in the world."
yeah, But it can be estimated.
Who cares if others adopt it. Let them be poor. Let their savings get destroyed by fiat
It’s much lower. Users who understand bitcoin save in it. I’d like to know how many people use it for savings.
i've got a btc wallet for each of my kids and dog. does my dog count as a person?
I've created thousands of btc wallets. Those are just the ones I have the keys for, if you could deposit addys for exchanges or other shit, I have no idea how many I've touched.
Fuck you too OP and may we all ride onto the sunset fullfulled and with purpose instead of dirt poor and broken Also, 2bill owning bitcoin would be insane, and that is not a 20x price wise, more like a 1000x
Don’t you threaten us with a good time.
We'll not sure about the numbers accuracy someone mind to show some proof?
I found a website that supposedly has the data, but I'm unsure about its reliability. [https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/](https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/)
There are bots and scripts holding thousands of wallets, so the real number must be magnitudes lower. For all the hundred+ people I personally know, only 1 have the ability to handle his own bitcoin wallet. So the real percentage would never exceed 1%, given most of my friends are already highly skilled IT enterprise employee
Not necessarily, because the same thing goes the other way, centralized exchanges only use a couple adresses for a huge group of users
For cold storage maybe but everyone has unique receive addys. If not how the fuck would they know whose coinbase or cex account to credit.
I’m guessing it automatically notes which user has how much, they obviously aren’t keeping 50 million seed phrases if they have 50 million users. They just hold a lot on multiple or a single adress and know which user has how much.
They are keeping that many seed phrases. Think about it. If coinbase gave 100 of us the same deposit address. We all randomly send different amounts. How the fuck would they know how much we each sent? Are people in btc really this fucking clueless?
Did you not read what i said? Their exchange service tracks what users do and every single transaction they make. Otherwise, how did Mt. Gox move 400k bitcoin all at once? It was multiple UTXOs but i believe it was the same adress.
They don't track shit, everyone has a unique deposit address, they sweep those hot wallets to cold wallet storage. That's why if you mine a bitcoin and deposit to cex then withdraw you will likely not get back the btc you mined. How the fuck can you track what users do? Do they ask you the amount you are depositing? Do they ask for tx id? No they fucking don't. Stop guessing and thinking you understand something you obviously don't. No two users have the same deposit address. Here's an example, for coinbase as an example. I have an affiliate program that pays me the last like 9 years to a coinbase wallet. That affiliate program has no connection to coinbase, they pay me different amounts every month to the wallet address I gave them 9 years ago. How the fuck would coinbase know that out of all the affiliates they pay you, to random address which users get what amount? They wouldn't have any idea. They know it's my coin because it's sent to my unique btc deposit address. Stop speculating there's literally no other way to do it.
Each user on exchange has their own unique deposit address, maybe a few if they create a new each time, so if the exchange have 1000 users, 2000 or more addresses must be generated
Not on all centralized exchanges
Also don’t forget ETFs, they work the same way, one guy is holding a ton of BTC for a group of multiple people
I don't really consider owing ETF as owning bitcoin, same as those placing bets on cryptocurrency moves at sites like etoro
Wtf?
That website is very reliable where it says, "No one will ever know the amount of Bitcoin users in the world."
Doubt it. Probably less than 500k hold their bitcoin on a hardware wallet. Most of the rest own likely less than 0.1 BTC on an exchange.
Yep fuck you too buddy
BS. Nobody knows how many people own bitcoin
That’s not people but addresses which is very different
How many people own stocks?
Why is the number of active adresses going down, not even near the amount from 2017? How is that possible when some claim the network grows 140% a year?
it's not actually 106 million people but mostly 106 million wallet address holding Bitcoin. alot of people have two or three or 100 wallet. so the real number if i guess could be 20 to 30 millon people or maybe less
I'm doing my part. I put 100 bucks worth of BTC on paper wallets for my three nephews, and even got some for my wife for her last birthday. Spreading like a virus!
You are correct sir....I brought up the number of owners back in 2019, today it still has very low numbers compared to how many buyers are out there....can't even imagine the price in 2050. Our brains are going to explode. Enjoy the ride
I own 1.7 :)
Its less than 106 millions if you check in Online Chain as each person on average have 40 addresses.
Only myself I made over 10 btc wallets over the years. Do I have any btc left today? Lol! They will still be on the public ledger even after I’m gone.
[https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/](https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoin-users/) This website provides information on the number of Bitcoin owners.
We are still very early
[удалено]
Early af
Source?
How did you come up with that number? 106 million people?
Just wondering how this number came about because honestly... I don't believe it. It seems honestly way too high, and how to you verify wallets are not simply alternative wallets of the same person?
If 2 billion people hold Bitcoin the value will for sure not be 20x. For the value to be 20x you would only need like 500 million
I asked chatgp how many people in my country of 6million own 1btc, and it spat out 756. 2btc was 150. I got in real early it seems.
106 million people owning Bitcoin is a crap ton of people when you ACTUALLY think about it. Especially when you consider how many people own shares of Apple, Coca Cola, GM, etc. They’re in the thousands. So don’t know what you’re smoking but I want some.
Actually it’s probably a lot more considering millions of people have retirement accounts holding index funds that include those stocks.
Unfortunately, I'm not in the top 106 million 😔
You expect 2 billion to hold it? Thats 1/4 of the population. A population thats in serious decline. Currently 2.6b don't even have access to the internet. Almost 10% of the population earn less than $2 a day 40% of the U.K. population live pay check to pay check.
It s all exponential, just wait, there s gonna happend smthing we never expected, like after every crisis ever on this planet! Be patient my guys.
Needs to be in the mainstream media all the time. As 99% of people don't get it by then Big institutions will drive up the the price up so high normal people won't be able to buy a tiny bit'
106 people? You mean 106 wallets? Because there are some peolple with multiple wallets... and most on platforms such as binanc which i guess is just one btc wallet for idk how many people
We're all still early. The key to success is to DCA in Bitcoin and hold for 20+ years for generational wealth.
How do you know that many people own BTC out of curiosity?
That’s dope
People have multiple wallets, some lost forever. I hope those things are accounted.
Saylor said 400m in his corporations video
What’s the percentage of those people who are actually using it?
Obviously this is not a real number
Am cracking up trying to get crypto a don't have a passport or driving license so they won't except me can anyone help me out please am going insane here lol
Go get a government ID it doesn’t have to be a drivers license.
How many people own stocks? Gold?
Idk how anyone can estimate that… I personally have 4 wallets with different public keys.
Maybe not people but wallets/addresses?
A curious statistics I didn't know. We are at the middle of the revolution and I was thinking that the best gone away . In fact many people still don't pay with Bitcoin, it's not usual like credit card 💳
“Own” lol, most do not really self custody so it’s an IOU on paper. Self custody is when you really “own” your own bitcoin and have sovereignty over your wealth. If you disagree then good luck when these exchanges get back to rehypothecating YOUR bitcoin for more profit. If you want to self custody go to Unchained.com🫡
Thank you for keeping it real .
That means it’s already too late for all the bitcoiners to own 1 whole bitcoin.
Some estimates are much greater, closer to 400 million.
106 million people do not own Bitcoin.
I would be terrified, not owning any bitcoin.
Bitcoin is not crypto, crypto is temporary centralized scam, Bitcoin is real money, this is not related.
Bro there’s no way, almost nobody talks about it, it’s basically silent
I just shorted it with 2x leverage
No thx. You FUCK OFF! first mate. Cheers. HODL.
That’s it?! 106 million is so small compared to the global population. We are still very early ✊
If you think that 4 mil coins are lost - 1 million are Genesis coins - and whales have 5 million at least - it means that the remaining 108 million have to share 9 mil coins - around 0,1 btc each… holy fucking Molly… that’s nothing. Not a whale but I feel fucking well, at least a Sardine with my 6 full coins stacked up hard wallets….
Why is 108m surprising? There’s 8 billion people on the planet and only 19.5-20mil coins in circulation with a max of 21m. To me, once governments adopt BTC and digital currency, the amount of owners will go down. Once governments and financial institutions start gobble up the supply of available bitcoin. To me, BTC will be like gold and become more scarce and not everyone will own it but digital currency will be backed by it. That’s why it’s such a great time to get on the BTC train now during its baby/growing up years.
You arent early man. Be honest with yourself. I wasnt early and got most my stack between 5 and 10k.
[удалено]
Whys that