How do we know what we know?

I'm a Bitcoin holder and proponent, so when I see FUD, especially in mainstream media, my desire is to disprove it and expose it for what it is- FUD.

However, the problem arises in that my sources invariably come from pro-Bitcoin sources such as The Bitcoin Standard, Inventing Bitcoin, Andreas Aantonopolous YouTube, 99Bitcoins, Swan BTC, etc.

This raises a conflict of interest. Why should a non-believer believe what I have to say when all of my sources are Bitcoin advocates or simply YouTube channels. Of course they will say pro Bitcoin things!

Is the answer running a full node? Why should we trust the above sources to accurately describe bitcoin?

Any help with this perplexing problem would be appreciated- S



Submitted February 27, 2023 at 12:19AM by Reywas3 https://ift.tt/JcQ8xIa

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

No, Bitcoin is not controlled by a small group of investors and miners (A rebuttal to the TechSpot article)

https://preview.redd.it/vli0ofqwf6w71.jpg?width=3840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2a704c47375637858c27216379ae8313dadf8be8 This could be a long read. Kindly bear with me. I write this primarily in response to the TechSpot article from yesterday ( r/technology mods told me they only allow “ mainstream articles with editorial oversight and fact-checking ” so I'm sharing this here). But I’d also like to take this opportunity to write about Bitcoin more broadly as someone who has been following it for more than a decade and I’ll try to do so without complicating the conversation for anyone unfamiliar with Bitcoin. The TechSpot article cites a non-peer-reviewed National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) working paper from Igor Makarov and Antoinette Schoar. NBER claims to be non-partisan but it is a private NPO funded by the likes of Bill Gates foundation . The chairman of NBER, Karen Horn, is a former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland and Head of Int...
Read more

Day 9: I will post this guide regularly until available solutions like SegWit, order batching, and Lightning payment channels are mass adopted, the mempool is empty once again, and tx fees are low. Have you done your part?

BACKGROUND Segregated Witness (SegWit) was activated on the Bitcoin network August 24 2017 as a soft fork that is backward compatible with previous bitcoin transactions ( Understanding Segregated Witness ). Since that time wallets and exchanges have been slow to deploy SegWit, and the majority of users have not made the switch themselves. On Dec 18 2017 Subhan Nadeem has pointed out that: If every transaction in the Bitcoin network was a SegWit transaction today, blocks would contain up to 8,000 transactions, and the 138,000 unconfirmed transaction backlog would disappear instantly. Transaction fees would be almost non-existent once again . Mass SegWit use alone could empty the mempool, result in blocks that are not completely full, and make it possible to include transactions with $0 fee once again. On Jan 11 2018 when BTC sends went offline at Coinbase the mempool began to rapidly empty. Later in the day when service was restored there was a sharp spike up in the mempool . Subse...
Read more