Re: Debunking the waste of energy argument against Bitcoin
I agree that the issue of Bitcoin's energy use is overblown hugely out of proportion - first of all because it isn't a waste if it serves a useful purpose. And securing the Bitcoin network has become a very useful purpose in itself. Never mind its implications for modern finance.
I also agree that Bitcoin's energy consumption is unfairly measured, unfairly compared, and unfairly valued. There are just so many factors to take into account other than simple "txs per unit of energy". At least with Bitcoin, you can actually more accurately quantify how much it costs to conduct commerce in the Bitcoin ecosystem. But look at alternatives like Visa (the favourite comparison)... you can't easily put a figure to how much it costs to conduct their commerce. You can estimate salaries of Visa employees, overheads for brick and mortar establishments, even budgets lines for marketing, for security, for brand, R&D, maintenance. None of the comparisons take these other cost-bearing aspects into consideration.
But I also agree that energy consumption should be considered - and it is actually an issue that's been debated even from four, five years ago. Rightfully so.
This. Can't blame politicians for picking a populist stand on Bitcoin, though. That's sort of their job
I also agree that Bitcoin's energy consumption is unfairly measured, unfairly compared, and unfairly valued. There are just so many factors to take into account other than simple "txs per unit of energy". At least with Bitcoin, you can actually more accurately quantify how much it costs to conduct commerce in the Bitcoin ecosystem. But look at alternatives like Visa (the favourite comparison)... you can't easily put a figure to how much it costs to conduct their commerce. You can estimate salaries of Visa employees, overheads for brick and mortar establishments, even budgets lines for marketing, for security, for brand, R&D, maintenance. None of the comparisons take these other cost-bearing aspects into consideration.
But I also agree that energy consumption should be considered - and it is actually an issue that's been debated even from four, five years ago. Rightfully so.
People complaining about Bitcoin's enegry consumption isn't really what I am bothered by. It's high level politicians talking about Bitcoin's energy consumption being an environmental disaster cracking me up. If they even bothered to care about the environment, they would do something about the larger oil corporations literally poisoning and killing everything that is alive, and that on a daily basis. Just look at what Shell is doing in Nigeria. It's going on for years, but no one even cares to sanction Shell. That basically also goes up for Exxon, Shevron, BP, Total, etc. As long as they are willing to pay their 'contributions', no one will even dare to sanction them, that's how things go - corruption is the desicive factor as always.
This. Can't blame politicians for picking a populist stand on Bitcoin, though. That's sort of their job