4 ms·
> A centralized solution - something like Transferwise - does not use as much energy as Bitcoin. Then your choice comes down to this: Use a centralized system
by deevolution 9y ago
> A centralized solution - something like Transferwise - does not use as much energy as Bitcoin.
Then your choice comes down to this: Use a centralized system for less energy consuming transaction but greater centralization of wealth -- or -- Use a distributed system that requires more energy but distributes wealth amongst network participants.
Personally, I would choose the system that distributes wealth at the expense of additional energy cost.
Ideally, I would choose the system that distribute wealth and has the least environmental impact.
- nemothekid 9y agoThis feels like a false choice. Why should I buy that the "decentralized system" distributes wealth at all? After all the top 1000 wallets hold 35% of bitcoin, and the top miners are factories that keep the best mining hardware to themselves. All of which compounds the fact that the participants in bitcoin were already wealthy enough from the "centralized" solution to buy into it.
- deevolution 9y agoBitcoin obviously has flaws, but Bitcoin is still doing a better job at distributing wealth than the banks are, thats for sure. Bitcoin may not be doing it efficiently or as well as it could be, but its doing it. Also... there are other cryptocurrecies with different intents and purposes. If you are unhappy with bitcoin, build an alternative. Ethereum proves that its possible. Our financial system, laws, and government are all malleable, and from the looks of it could use some serious change.