4 ms·

Even if the electricity argument succeeds in harming bitcoin, luckily there are many Proof of Stake coins such as Polkadot and (soon) Ethereum that will use a f

Even if the electricity argument succeeds in harming bitcoin, luckily there are many Proof of Stake coins such as Polkadot and (soon) Ethereum that will use a fraction of the electricity. So no-coiners will have to use a different argument. They have definitely started pushing this one hard even though IMO it’s disingenuous given most BTC is mined through carbon-neutral sources like hydro and geothermal.

bob33212 6y ago
It is really interesting to see the crypto topic become so polarized. Either you think it is this amazing revolution that will be the future or you are a "No-Coiner" and you are against crypto. During the DOT COM bubble things were not this divided. There were certainly plenty of people pointing out that giving a company 100M just because they own a domain name may not end well, but it wasn't this heated. I assume this is because of social media. A lot more people have voices to point out flaws in the other side's arguments and then everyone gets echo chambered into one of two sides with the arguments that best support their side.
- Igelau 6y ago
  Social media might be an amplifier, but the vehemence with which proponents of crypto defend its legitimacy reminds me of the people who defend MLMs. If you say "hey, isn't this a pyramid scheme?" to folks who have managed to slip into a profitable tier of the... well.. pyramid, they immediately lash out with circular claims like "obviously this isn't a pyramid scheme, because those are illegal!" So yeah, everyone defending crypto is trying to bootstrap the illusion of its value as anything while simultaneously trying to un-map it from comparisons to recognizable scams. They have more dollars than they should tied to both of these dreams.
  - bob33212 6y ago
    This is what I'm talking about. You are assuming the worst intentions or at least singling out the worst actors. Because of this polarization I'm having a really hard time gauging how many people are actually scammers vs the type of person who really thought in 1999 that shoes.com would have a monopoly on shoe sales in the future.
    - Igelau 6y ago
      > You are assuming the worst intentions I'm not assuming anyone's intentions. > singling out the worst actors I might be doing this unknowingly. I only have my own perceptions to draw on. Those perceptions, as you rightly observe, may be distorted by what bubbles up out of social media and HN commentaries.
eecc 6y ago
It’s not carbon-neutral as long as it interferes with renewables displacing carbon. I’m totally fine and will jump in crypto with both feet the day it stops pissing so much energy in the wind

bob33212 6y ago

It is really interesting to see the crypto topic become so polarized. Either you think it is this amazing revolution that will be the future or you are a "No-Coiner" and you are against crypto. During the DOT COM bubble things were not this divided. There were certainly plenty of people pointing out that giving a company 100M just because they own a domain name may not end well, but it wasn't this heated. I assume this is because of social media. A lot more people have voices to point out flaws in the other side's arguments and then everyone gets echo chambered into one of two sides with the arguments that best support their side.

Igelau 6y ago
Social media might be an amplifier, but the vehemence with which proponents of crypto defend its legitimacy reminds me of the people who defend MLMs. If you say "hey, isn't this a pyramid scheme?" to folks who have managed to slip into a profitable tier of the... well.. pyramid, they immediately lash out with circular claims like "obviously this isn't a pyramid scheme, because those are illegal!" So yeah, everyone defending crypto is trying to bootstrap the illusion of its value as anything while simultaneously trying to un-map it from comparisons to recognizable scams. They have more dollars than they should tied to both of these dreams.
- bob33212 6y ago
  This is what I'm talking about. You are assuming the worst intentions or at least singling out the worst actors. Because of this polarization I'm having a really hard time gauging how many people are actually scammers vs the type of person who really thought in 1999 that shoes.com would have a monopoly on shoe sales in the future.
  - Igelau 6y ago
    > You are assuming the worst intentions I'm not assuming anyone's intentions. > singling out the worst actors I might be doing this unknowingly. I only have my own perceptions to draw on. Those perceptions, as you rightly observe, may be distorted by what bubbles up out of social media and HN commentaries.

eecc 6y ago

It’s not carbon-neutral as long as it interferes with renewables displacing carbon. I’m totally fine and will jump in crypto with both feet the day it stops pissing so much energy in the wind