3 ms·

>My point is that btc is being targeted as big bad meanwhile same people who demonize it for its environmental damage are perfectly fine with heavy industry cau

>My point is that btc is being targeted as big bad meanwhile same people who demonize it for its environmental damage are perfectly fine with heavy industry causing global warming. The difference is that with heavy industry, we sacrifice environmental quality in exchange for a product with known utility (gas to make our cars go, energy to light/heat our homes, etc). While industrial products can function as a medium for speculation, and do make a few people very rich, they are still primarily produced for immediate consumption. Bitcoin does not, per se, provide any utility to anyone other than speculation.

me_me_me 6y ago
Plastic to make cheap crap people discard in seconds. New phones that are bought every half a year to status signal to peers. If you are using utilitarian angle then stick to it, and not cherry pick. Whats the difference between wasting energy on btc mining and listening to music via spotify or youtube? I pick this example as wasteful since you could download music once and listen to it instead using BW every time you listen to a song. The whole wall street is primary waste of energy and resources as they are not creating anything but forcing themselves to be a middleman that suck the wealth out. Furthermore saying btc having 'no utility' is laughable. Its not a pet rock (which has a stupid utility too if you insist). Its main utility is ability to transfer it between parties securely and quickly. You don't like it and you might have no use for it, as I have no use for spanish soap operas or crystal healing treatments. But that doesnt change the fact that there is some utility in it.
- jasonlaramburu 6y ago
  >Its main utility is ability to transfer it between parties securely and quickly But that's not utility. That's just another form of currency and there are already better, cheaper and more secure ways to transfer currency between two parties. There is literally nothing I can do with a bitcoin other than sell it to someone else.
  - me_me_me 6y ago
    > and there are already better, cheaper and more secure ways to transfer currency between two parties. Like for example...? BTC is hardly a currency (it was intended purpose but it not capable in its current form), its utility is ease of transfer over to anyone. Try to transfer money from US to EU or African country. Let's see how easy that is going to be. You have to rely on third party actors and government to facilitate it (just reminding - we are not debating if that good or bad thing, just that btc is more than a worse implementation of a currency).
    - jasonlaramburu 6y ago
      >Like for example...? Venmo/cashapp/paypal are great and basically free for small p2p transfers within the US. ACH transfers and Wires also work well for larger amounts and have fixed costs, not a fluctuating % of a transaction value like BTC. It's also very easy to send international wires via SWIFT to most countries (including African ones). Most of the countries where it is 'hard' to wire money are under sanctions, a problem that BTC does not solve. >You have to rely on third party actors and government to facilitate it Yes, 3rd parties like the FDIC who insure your money for free. You also have to rely on (potentially multiple) 3rd parties if you actually want to spend your BTC on anything. You also have the added complication of price slippage. If BTC were really better at sending money than fiat-based solutions wouldn't more people use it for that purpose by now?
      - me_me_me 6y ago
        > Venmo/cashapp/paypal... ugh, yeah sure. Via magical thinking maybe. Not to mention you have to pay bank to have an account in the first place. You are shifting goalpost of this discussion every post, its pointless to keep on pointing out holes in you 'arguments'. Btc has a utility therefore your original argument is invalid.
        jasonlaramburu 6y ago
        I’m just saying BTC is not useful for anything today. I’ve not changed my argument or goal post. I think it’s a cool tech and accept that it may one day be useful, but today it doesn’t make anyone’s life easier. If I want to send a friend money (via BTC) I have to wire fiat from my bank to an exchange, buy BTC, send it to his address and pay a fee. Then he has to do the same in reverse and pay a fee to convert to fiat.

me_me_me 6y ago

Plastic to make cheap crap people discard in seconds. New phones that are bought every half a year to status signal to peers. If you are using utilitarian angle then stick to it, and not cherry pick. Whats the difference between wasting energy on btc mining and listening to music via spotify or youtube? I pick this example as wasteful since you could download music once and listen to it instead using BW every time you listen to a song. The whole wall street is primary waste of energy and resources as they are not creating anything but forcing themselves to be a middleman that suck the wealth out. Furthermore saying btc having 'no utility' is laughable. Its not a pet rock (which has a stupid utility too if you insist). Its main utility is ability to transfer it between parties securely and quickly. You don't like it and you might have no use for it, as I have no use for spanish soap operas or crystal healing treatments. But that doesnt change the fact that there is some utility in it.

jasonlaramburu 6y ago
>Its main utility is ability to transfer it between parties securely and quickly But that's not utility. That's just another form of currency and there are already better, cheaper and more secure ways to transfer currency between two parties. There is literally nothing I can do with a bitcoin other than sell it to someone else.
- me_me_me 6y ago
  > and there are already better, cheaper and more secure ways to transfer currency between two parties. Like for example...? BTC is hardly a currency (it was intended purpose but it not capable in its current form), its utility is ease of transfer over to anyone. Try to transfer money from US to EU or African country. Let's see how easy that is going to be. You have to rely on third party actors and government to facilitate it (just reminding - we are not debating if that good or bad thing, just that btc is more than a worse implementation of a currency).
  - jasonlaramburu 6y ago
    >Like for example...? Venmo/cashapp/paypal are great and basically free for small p2p transfers within the US. ACH transfers and Wires also work well for larger amounts and have fixed costs, not a fluctuating % of a transaction value like BTC. It's also very easy to send international wires via SWIFT to most countries (including African ones). Most of the countries where it is 'hard' to wire money are under sanctions, a problem that BTC does not solve. >You have to rely on third party actors and government to facilitate it Yes, 3rd parties like the FDIC who insure your money for free. You also have to rely on (potentially multiple) 3rd parties if you actually want to spend your BTC on anything. You also have the added complication of price slippage. If BTC were really better at sending money than fiat-based solutions wouldn't more people use it for that purpose by now?
    - me_me_me 6y ago
      > Venmo/cashapp/paypal... ugh, yeah sure. Via magical thinking maybe. Not to mention you have to pay bank to have an account in the first place. You are shifting goalpost of this discussion every post, its pointless to keep on pointing out holes in you 'arguments'. Btc has a utility therefore your original argument is invalid.
      - jasonlaramburu 6y ago
        I’m just saying BTC is not useful for anything today. I’ve not changed my argument or goal post. I think it’s a cool tech and accept that it may one day be useful, but today it doesn’t make anyone’s life easier. If I want to send a friend money (via BTC) I have to wire fiat from my bank to an exchange, buy BTC, send it to his address and pay a fee. Then he has to do the same in reverse and pay a fee to convert to fiat.