3 ms·

He seems to support his 60% figure with a lot of evidence [0][1] and you have agreed in the past that if anything 60% is the number your model converges to as w

by hudon 8y ago

He seems to support his 60% figure with a lot of evidence [0][1] and you have agreed in the past that if anything 60% is the number your model converges to as well... Anyway, the discussion is a good one and I'm glad at least 2 people are concerned about this. This is exactly the kind of thing we should be truth-seeking on, as well as finding use cases... not if Wall Street is finally allowing people who don't know any better to keep fueling the beast. [0] https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption#validation https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption#validati... [1] https://digiconomist.net/re-serious-faults-in-beci https://digiconomist.net/re-serious-faults-in-beci

mrb 8y ago
[0] and [1] present zero evidence for supporting 60% as a current valid estimate. [0] even misrepresents the Morgan Stanley report (which actually supports my numbers, not his): http://blog.zorinaq.com/serious-faults-in-beci/#critic-6-author-misrepresents-morgan-stanleys-reports http://blog.zorinaq.com/serious-faults-in-beci/#critic-6-aut... Alex of Digiconomist is very good at writing long verbose paragraphs that "seem" to support his model, but when we look at his actual data and logic, it's full of holes, flaws, and poor assumptions. One of the things we both agree on is that in the future (1 year? 10 years?) the ratio will tend toward 40 to 60%. But that doesn't say anything about the ratio as of today.