> I'm looking for a compare and contrast between A and B. And I do appreciate your replies, but unless I'm missing something, they seem like two summaries of A

> I'm looking for a compare and contrast between A and B. And I do appreciate your replies, but unless I'm missing something, they seem like two summaries of A and no discussion of B. And not how B is different from A. Which is what I'm trying to parse out. Influencer effect, I suppose? Really, it's as you said: it's no different than what has been said by others. I supposed the caveat being that Elon is the darling of the tech World, particularly in the startup World with desires to replicate his success. I mean even Al Gore was saying the same thing if you think about it, albeit with the typical limousine liberal behaviour where he was flying all over the World in his private jet (like Elon, btw) talking about the perils of Climate Change, or as it was referred to back then: Global Warming. > Crypto does have a high demand and growing demand for energy. That is mainly renewables. But to me, Was there a part to this that segues into the following part as I feel that was critical to what was followed wasn't entirely substantiated? While I do not want to speak on behalf of anything other than Bitcoin, it must be said lot of cryptocurrencies are not based on a PoW system, but rather a PoS system, that doesn't require intense mining process that many of BTC's detractors point toward. Moreover, I think what is missing here is that the end (creating more renewable energy thus lessening the dependence of fossil fuels) is just being incentivized by the means (mining Bitcoin). We can sit here and debate if that's the best way, but I've been dissapointed with the Energy landscape for so long that I'll take the win how ever I can get it, and Bitcoin has and will likely continue to do so as it's no become institutional and mainstream. I'm not advocating for a surplus since practical storage is not here just yet, check my recent post on why as CA has had to turn off it's solar production in Sept 21' because of a skweed economic disincentive, because the energy created could have been used for mining which then could be coupled with heat capturing processes to yield other desirable but energy intensive practices: greenhouse warming, nursing incubating, aqua culture etc... which would help make it carbon neutral or ideally carbon negative. All of these things have been undertaken in some capacity in the BTC space, but clearly not enough since most of it was mined in China for most of it's history, I'm just saying that as it relocates to the West where it's more likely to occur is a net benefit. Smart contracts are a 3 hour conversation for me: I spent time at a Megacorp as a dev and consultant being forced to use ETH and solidity when LN and RTSK are now far more capable of doing anything it could do on the most secure network. And even as an advocate, I think it's only part of net benefit of Bitcoin's network: people simply don't seem to see the value of having an immutable pubic ledger that is backed by he most secure network man has ever devised yet. We'll get there.