5 ms·

I'm not sure that spinning that as a positive is a good idea. It's objectively a massive amount.

• UncleMeat 5y ago
  The argument I've seen is that worldwide adoption of BTC will somehow end armies and therefore be a net improvement worldwide. How? Not sure.
  • IMTDb 5y ago
    When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
  • gota 5y ago
    I've heard similar arguments. One aspect brought up was that crypto money is "impossible to steal". I argued that the old pipe wrench is so effective that after a practical example the threat of the old pipe wrench is enough to break any cryptography whose key is known by a pipe-wrenchable individual. At that point, the individual needs his/her own pipe wrench. And it is usually a good idea to aggregate with trusted others to pool resources and get a bigger, stronger pipe wrench. Which is the military. I did not get a response other than that my reasoning is flawed and oversimplifies the issue. Which, tbh, it definitely does
• danboarder 5y ago
  Perhaps the idea is to reduce the size of the worlds military industrial complex by more than 2%, and boom, you have Bitcoin offset. Is reducing the military carbon footprint delusional? (I'll answer that, it probably is :/ ).
  • bingbong70 5y ago
    Going to be hard to maintain the military industrial complex when central banks lose the ability to print money without massive devaluation.