I’m incredibly surprised at the number of flaws here. It’s not like you. Mostly you’re just growing your begging the question fallacy. You’re assuming that bitcoin will “bring you unhappiness” because it will crash…which you assume will happen because everyone thinks like you and they also assume it will bring them unhappiness because it will crash…because it will crash. So your argument is that it will crash because you assume it will crash…because you assume everyone else believes what you believe.
And you extrapolate this from the notion that there is no flaw in your circular reasoning, that everyone thinks like you, and that everyone thinks like you because there is no flaw in your reasoning (which I would have to guess means you assume no one ever makes mistakes in reasoning).
And the bit about “there’s no reason a priori to think that email would bring you unhappiness” is quite circular as well. My point is that you didn’t need to be convinced to use PDF…that you used it because you found it to be useful…precisely because other people were using it. Just like email. And you somehow claim that helps your argument that people need to be convinced to use things. And then you claim that you used those things “because they gave you happiness” whereas you believe bitcoin will give you “unhappiness”…because you think it will crash because you assume everyone thinks like you…and they assume it will crash because everyone thinks like them…because they believe their reasoning is not flawed…and therefore everyone would agree with it…because no one ever believes in anything with flawed reasoning.