4 ms·
bitcoin does it better by not being a pre-mine scam and still having 0 fees and instant transactions on lightning.
by keymone 5y ago
bitcoin does it better by not being a pre-mine scam and still having 0 fees and instant transactions on lightning.
- koonsolo 5y agoDistribution of Nano was more fair than bitcoin. Just saying. And lightning transactions have fees. Also just saying.
- keymone 5y ago> Distribution of Nano was more fair than bitcoin yes, that's what all pre-miners say. lightning network fees are negligible, you should try it one day.
- koonsolo 5y agoNeglectible is not 0. And I'm not a pre-miner
- keymone 5y agonegligible is basically 0. you're not a pre-miner (though maybe you are, how do i know?), nano "founders" are pre-mining scammers.
- catlikesshrimp 5y agoWhy should an average user care that founders are premining "scammers"? An average user won't be a miner and an average user doesn't have an investment in any platform. Someone saying x-crypto is a premining scam is somebody who invests in another platform and is advertising.
- keymone 5y agoBecause in PoS holders of large amount of assets are also political elite that gets to make the rules.
- koonsolo 5y agoNano is green, Bitcoin an environmental hazard :D. But I'm sure we're not coming to an agreement :D.
- keymone 5y agoNo environmental hazard, it's a myth. PoS is no greener than PoW, they are equally expensive. PoS is expensive in political plane (just like current financial system with all the corruption and wars) while Bitcoin is expensive purely in terms of energy. I know which one i prefer.
- markdestouches 5y agoThe fees of bitcoin are paid in the damage to the environment done by mining. It is vastly more expensive than traditional banking. The only difference is that it's not paid by the user directly, but by the whole of humanity.
- keymone 5y agobitcoin doesn't damage environment by mining, that's just a dumb thing people like to repeat without spending a second to think about it. first - damage is done by producers of energy, not consumers second - yes, consumers create the demand for energy, which drives producers to do harm, but harm is still producer's responsibility third - if we want to reduce environmental harm, it is much more sensible to regulate producers in how they produce rather than regulating consumers in what they consume for fourth - even if you somehow want to blame consumers - bitcoin mining actually drives development of green energy, increasing capacity, making green producers more profitable, allowing more development and r&d in that segment of energy production industry, so even by that ridiculous standard bitcoin mining is the last energy-consuming industry you want to be going after
- presentation 5y agoI guess I'll just leave a firehose blowing water out my window because it's not me who's literally sourcing tap water, it's the utilities, and if they do that by overusing and destroying some watershed it's not my fault since I'm not literally the one doing it. It's too bad my plan is not nearly as profitable as mining bitcoin though...
- keymone 5y agoFree markets are beautiful.