> Because vehicles bring value So you must now convince people why crypto does not bring value, which first requires coherently stating the argument for why it

> Because vehicles bring value So you must now convince people why crypto does not bring value, which first requires coherently stating the argument for why it does - which most skeptics fail and which you have not attempted. > I'd be shocked if video games as an industry outranked crypto for energy use The point is that they use energy, and is that energy worth the benefit? No one brings that up when discussing climate - so an ignorance of the value crypto can bring must be the source rather than genuine bookkeeping on value vs. energy usage. If we are really cutting back than I don't see how most video games have any place in our electric grid. > Machine Learning is computationally expensive, but unlike crypto, is basically constantly trying to make their systems faster and more efficient all the time. Unlike crypto? This is why skeptics like you get ridiculed. Spending two days researching crypto will reveal that most of the market which isn't into simply holding Bitcoin and waiting or DeFi schemes is solely focused on making ledgers more efficient. > scaling current crypto up to that levels would bring its energy use to astronomical levels. Again raw ignorance of the technology, economics and logistics of it all drives your thinking. Layered, custodial approaches, PoS advancements and why that all works seem to be beyond what you understand about the space despite your persistent pontification about the direction it should be heading.