3 ms·

I think the former method of creating currency is fairer and more transparent.

by VMG 9y ago

Nuzzerino 9y ago
Is this how 250 kWh of energy usage per BTC transaction is supposed to be considered ethical?
- VMG 9y ago
  It is more ethical than financing wars through deficit spending. A on-chain bitcoin transaction allows an arbitrary number of off-chain transactions.
  - rspeer 9y ago
    How many times are people going to try whataboutism on HN? Everyone can recognize it by now. The existence of war does not absolve you. If your standard of morality is "everything that's better than war is okay", you have approximately no morality.
    - VMG 9y ago
      The whataboutism started with uninformed statements about bitcoin energy usage. My rebuttal is about the costs of the alternatives.
      - Nuzzerino 9y ago
        Call it whatever you want. The days of proof-of-work are numbered, I can guarantee you that.
        VMG 9y ago
        https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf
frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
Well it's obviously not necessarily more transparent. I know that the Fed is creating money, I can find out how much it's creating and I can listen to government officials explain why we should create more/less money or why we should make money in this instance but not that one, etc. I can even vote for people whose dollar creation opinions line up with mine. In BTC I don't know who's creating it, what they believe about it and I have no way to affect their creation of it. Seems like the democratic governing system is more fair and transparent so where did I go wrong?
- VMG 9y ago
  If you disagree with money printing, your vote will not matter. In bitcoin, the inflation schedule can be checked very easily. It doesn't matter who is creating it as long as the supply is stable and predictable.
  - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
    >If you disagree with money printing, your vote will not matter. It would matter more than my (non-existent) vote in bitcoin would. >It doesn't matter who is creating it as long as the supply is stable and predictable. So to be clear, your problem isn't that the fed is centralized and btc is decentralized it's that btc is regular and the fed can be irregular?
    - VMG 9y ago
      > It would matter more than my (non-existent) vote in bitcoin would. You don't have to use it though. > So to be clear, your problem isn't that the fed is centralized and btc is decentralized it's that btc is regular and the fed can be irregular? Both aspects are problematic. It's not only the FED that is centralized, the banking system itself is. Bitcoin is Peer-to-peer without trusted third parties.
  - amarkov 9y ago
    In Bitcoin, the number of outstanding currency units can be checked very easily. What I care about as a consumer is being able to predict the value of my currency at future times. Bitcoin doesn't allow me to do this at all.

I think the former method of creating currency is fairer and more transparent.

by VMG 9y ago

I think the former method of creating currency is fairer and more transparent.

Nuzzerino 9y ago

Is this how 250 kWh of energy usage per BTC transaction is supposed to be considered ethical?

VMG 9y ago
It is more ethical than financing wars through deficit spending. A on-chain bitcoin transaction allows an arbitrary number of off-chain transactions.
- rspeer 9y ago
  How many times are people going to try whataboutism on HN? Everyone can recognize it by now. The existence of war does not absolve you. If your standard of morality is "everything that's better than war is okay", you have approximately no morality.
  - VMG 9y ago
    The whataboutism started with uninformed statements about bitcoin energy usage. My rebuttal is about the costs of the alternatives.
    - Nuzzerino 9y ago
      Call it whatever you want. The days of proof-of-work are numbered, I can guarantee you that.
      - VMG 9y ago
        https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf

frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago

Well it's obviously not necessarily more transparent. I know that the Fed is creating money, I can find out how much it's creating and I can listen to government officials explain why we should create more/less money or why we should make money in this instance but not that one, etc. I can even vote for people whose dollar creation opinions line up with mine. In BTC I don't know who's creating it, what they believe about it and I have no way to affect their creation of it. Seems like the democratic governing system is more fair and transparent so where did I go wrong?

VMG 9y ago
If you disagree with money printing, your vote will not matter. In bitcoin, the inflation schedule can be checked very easily. It doesn't matter who is creating it as long as the supply is stable and predictable.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  >If you disagree with money printing, your vote will not matter. It would matter more than my (non-existent) vote in bitcoin would. >It doesn't matter who is creating it as long as the supply is stable and predictable. So to be clear, your problem isn't that the fed is centralized and btc is decentralized it's that btc is regular and the fed can be irregular?
  - VMG 9y ago
    > It would matter more than my (non-existent) vote in bitcoin would. You don't have to use it though. > So to be clear, your problem isn't that the fed is centralized and btc is decentralized it's that btc is regular and the fed can be irregular? Both aspects are problematic. It's not only the FED that is centralized, the banking system itself is. Bitcoin is Peer-to-peer without trusted third parties.
- amarkov 9y ago
  In Bitcoin, the number of outstanding currency units can be checked very easily. What I care about as a consumer is being able to predict the value of my currency at future times. Bitcoin doesn't allow me to do this at all.