5 ms·

I almost typed a snarky remark, but then realized that you make a valid point with that analogy. However the analogy feels a little weak to me: > We even had t

I almost typed a snarky remark, but then realized that you make a valid point with that analogy. However the analogy feels a little weak to me: > We even had to go to war to make sure we have enough oil I don't see countries going to war over BTC (or the mining pool) as they already have cornered all the fiat currencies in a tight system. All they could do is sabotage the BTC system and make it less lucrative for normal public.

lowkey 6y ago
> I don't see countries going to war over BTC (or the mining pool) as they already have cornered all the fiat currencies in a tight system. I think that's the point here. Unlike BTC which is powered by Proof of Work (POW), the US Dollar is powered by Proof of Violence (POV). As a result the full accounting for the externalities caused by US dollars would have to include the cost of supporting and using the largest military industrial complex in the history of the world to protect the market for oil being denominated in US Dollars (petrodollars).
- smolder 6y ago
  Fiat is not powered by "proof of violence" because violence is not needed for it to function. It is maintained by social contract and the threat of violence, because otherwise it could only depend on trust, and trust is very expensive, as Bitcoin proves.
  - TimJRobinson 6y ago
    You need to have an army and weapons to enforce that threat, which costs a lot of energy to maintain.
    - smolder 6y ago
      Yes, fair point.
glitchc 6y ago
Yet! Taking over mining power or electricity resources could certainly propel wars of the future if Bitcoin becomes the reserve currency of the world.
- fredfoobar 6y ago
  I'm sensing a small nuance missed here, I'll clarify pro-actively: Adding more energy to your mining operation won't result in more bitcoin for you, you will only make the network more secure. Mining bitcoin is mostly about securing the bitcoin network and there is a small reward for doing so.
  - glitchc 6y ago
    ~600K USD per block is not “small” :). Mining power is directly correlated to cost of electricity. Most mining is located in electricity-rich districts for good reason. It’s the only cost-effective way to sustain the network. Those regions are scarce across the globe, ergo in high demand.
    - fredfoobar 6y ago
      I like how you get so close to the truth and then shy away into your biases. People are funny. Are you going to lead the crusade against Christmas lights? https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countries.html https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countr...
      - glitchc 6y ago
        I'm sorry.. this feels like whataboutism and it misses the point entirely. Christmas trees are hung for festive purposes, not monetary gain. With Bitcoin, electricity is a major cost input that drives miner actions. We see them move collectively to lower energy jurisdictions to keep mining activities as profitable as possible. Hydroelectric dams are the cheapest, most consistent source of energy. It's no surprise that miners move en masse to sources of hydroelectricity. And you can't just throw up a hydroelectric dam anywhere, it's very much a function of geography. Some places are blessed [1], others less so. If you do have a salient point to make about the "truth," perhaps you should come out and make it. I'm sure a bunch of us would be happy to hear it. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-27/bitcoin-miners-in-nordic-region-get-a-boost-from-cheap-power https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-27/bitcoin-m...

lowkey 6y ago

> I don't see countries going to war over BTC (or the mining pool) as they already have cornered all the fiat currencies in a tight system. I think that's the point here. Unlike BTC which is powered by Proof of Work (POW), the US Dollar is powered by Proof of Violence (POV). As a result the full accounting for the externalities caused by US dollars would have to include the cost of supporting and using the largest military industrial complex in the history of the world to protect the market for oil being denominated in US Dollars (petrodollars).

smolder 6y ago
Fiat is not powered by "proof of violence" because violence is not needed for it to function. It is maintained by social contract and the threat of violence, because otherwise it could only depend on trust, and trust is very expensive, as Bitcoin proves.
- TimJRobinson 6y ago
  You need to have an army and weapons to enforce that threat, which costs a lot of energy to maintain.
  - smolder 6y ago
    Yes, fair point.

glitchc 6y ago

Yet! Taking over mining power or electricity resources could certainly propel wars of the future if Bitcoin becomes the reserve currency of the world.

fredfoobar 6y ago
I'm sensing a small nuance missed here, I'll clarify pro-actively: Adding more energy to your mining operation won't result in more bitcoin for you, you will only make the network more secure. Mining bitcoin is mostly about securing the bitcoin network and there is a small reward for doing so.
- glitchc 6y ago
  ~600K USD per block is not “small” :). Mining power is directly correlated to cost of electricity. Most mining is located in electricity-rich districts for good reason. It’s the only cost-effective way to sustain the network. Those regions are scarce across the globe, ergo in high demand.
  - fredfoobar 6y ago
    I like how you get so close to the truth and then shy away into your biases. People are funny. Are you going to lead the crusade against Christmas lights? https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countries.html https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countr...
    - glitchc 6y ago
      I'm sorry.. this feels like whataboutism and it misses the point entirely. Christmas trees are hung for festive purposes, not monetary gain. With Bitcoin, electricity is a major cost input that drives miner actions. We see them move collectively to lower energy jurisdictions to keep mining activities as profitable as possible. Hydroelectric dams are the cheapest, most consistent source of energy. It's no surprise that miners move en masse to sources of hydroelectricity. And you can't just throw up a hydroelectric dam anywhere, it's very much a function of geography. Some places are blessed [1], others less so. If you do have a salient point to make about the "truth," perhaps you should come out and make it. I'm sure a bunch of us would be happy to hear it. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-27/bitcoin-miners-in-nordic-region-get-a-boost-from-cheap-power https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-27/bitcoin-m...