19 ms·
Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire
- __B_B__ 4y agoWhining about proof of work. Check. Whining about ransomware. Check. Ponzi scheme. Check. What an organic article and opinion.
- oriolid 4y agoSo, so you have definite proof that nobody could figure out these problems on their own?
- Comevius 4y agoI found it informative, Nicholas Weaver knows what he is talking about. He calls these criminal enterprises for what they are.
- WaxedChewbacca 4y ago
- criddell 4y agoLow effort comments ripping on other people’s work contributes nothing to the discussion. You clearly have a different point of view so why not rebut the article or post your own laying out a counter opinion?
- __B_B__ 4y agoWell let me put it to you this way. He whines about proof of work, as is popular to do. Proof of work means to expend resources to produce a true statement such that the cost of lying is prohibitive, because producing an accurate record is better than producing nothing, given the same expenditure. Cost of refutation is a related rhetorical concept. If this worthless article is going to can a few common critical tropes, all previously addressed, even by other technologies in the same space it aimed at, why should I do anything other than respond with equivalently low effort? Because you want me to expend the resources? I thought wasted resources were bad? That's the premise of the whining after all, isn't it? Disingenuous, worthless article, preying upon stupidity, fear and moral outrage, which just happened to be filed within days of most cryptos dropping 25% in price, roughly, in the middle of a bear market.
- WaxedChewbacca 4y ago
- ogogmad 4y agoThis might be a purely stylistic criticism, but it's hard to take articles seriously when they lack professionalism: "Why all cryptocurrencies should die in a fire". I can see the editor smiling and rolling his eyes when making that title. It was cute at some point, but now it's painful, and it's unprofessional.
- Comevius 4y agoIt's a casual interview, not a dissertation. Beside the tone is the right one, crypto does a lot of damage to the planet and society for the benefit of a few already wealthy people, while pretending to be doing the opposite.
- bshepard 4y agoSurely, yes, but the whole social metasystem does a lot of damage to the planet for the benefit of the few, so why scapegoat one part of the system?
- giantrobot 4y agoBecause it is wasteful by design and gets more wasteful as it scales. Transaction fees are onerous and transactions themselves are excruciatingly slow. Then the deflationary nature of cryptocurrencies makes them terrible currencies. It makes more economic sense to hold them than spend them. The rare events where their use doesn't involve crime are overwhelmed by the criminal uses.
- jakupovic 4y ago>Because it is wasteful by design and gets more wasteful as it scales Plenty of other things are wasteful by design, like military for example. The more military things we build, the stronger we'll be. Same with BTC hashrate, the more power the stronger the network.
- _Algernon_ 4y agoOur entire fossil fuel driven economy is also "wasteful by design".
- jamesredd 4y agoThis guy calls Elon Musk a "walking talking Dunning-Kruger syndrome". That's the level of discourse you can expect from him.
- alkonaut 4y agoI have never read a more apt description of a person. Sure, it’s childish, edgy and inflammatory. See now I accidentally wrote another Musk characterization.
- HL33tibCe7 4y agoTrue though
- fastball 4y agoElon Musk mostly speaks about things he actually is an expert on though?
- jakupovic 4y agoWhat is Musk an expert in? Besides being a rich school boy?
- fastball 4y agoHighly automated car manufacturing and rockets for starters.
- scaramanga 4y agoNot to mention ridding Gotham city of crime. Sorry, damn, that was Bruce Wayne.
- fastball 4y agoThe irony of making a claim that Elon Musk has a bad case of the Dunning-Krugers and not being able to support such a claim with anything beyond unfunny jokes.
- lordofgibbons 4y agoI will gladly stop using Monero if someone can tell me how to privately transact over the internet without CC companies (and others) spying on me and selling my data. Until there is a better solution, I'll keep using it.
- jimbob45 4y agoPrepaid debit cards?
- yowmamasita 4y agoHow do you buy these without giving any personal information?
- bcherny 4y agoI’ve seen them for sale in supermarkets.
- silverPoodle 4y agoIn the European Union there is an online transaction limit of 50€ for prepaid cards. That's no alternative to Monero
- saurik 4y agoThey require you to log in and identify yourself before they can be activated.
- lrvick 4y agoMost actually do not require this. I buy visa gift cards with cash all the time from gas stations etc and spend them anywhere that does not take cash with no activation.
- lelandfe 4y agoI've never owned crypto but I can see the appeal for privacy's sake. Even going to the market can mean sacrificing privacy – retailers are constant abusers of personal data. Did you park at the market? Oops, they read all license plates to build a marketing profile.[0][1] See an ad online, and then later went into the store? Oops, Google picked up on that and told the retailer.[2] Did you leave your face uncovered when you went into the market? Oops, they use facial recognition.[3] [0] https://www.syracuse.com/news/2014/06/who_else_is_tracking_your_license_plates_its_not_just_police.html https://www.syracuse.com/news/2014/06/who_else_is_tracking_y... [1] https://drndata.com/ https://drndata.com/ [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20170523182250/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/05/23/google-now-knows-when-you-are-at-a-cash-register-and-how-much-you-are-spending/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170523182250/https://www.washi... [3] https://www.axios.com/2021/07/19/facial-recognition-retail-surge https://www.axios.com/2021/07/19/facial-recognition-retail-s...
- ogogmad 4y agoBlockchain cryptocurrencies rely on the economic incentives of PoW (or something similar) in order to function correctly. Has anybody modelled how the miners might behave under varied circumstances? So far, the incentives seem to be working correctly, with no double-spend attacks happening.
- Retric 4y agoDouble spend attacks have happened, but having lots of hazing power doesn’t prevent them. A software vulnerability for example can render unlimited hashing power pointless.
- ogogmad 4y agoMy comment was asking about purely the economic side of things... That's the part of crypto that's hardest to judge.
- latchkey 4y agoYes, there are a ton of papers up on arxiv on all sorts of topics around mining and PoW [1]. There have been plenty of double-spend attacks that have happened. For example, ETC has a 6.5 day deposit time on Kraken. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=arxiv+mining+pow https://www.google.com/search?q=arxiv+mining+pow [2] https://support.kraken.com/hc/en-us/articles/203325283-Cryptocurrency-deposit-processing-times https://support.kraken.com/hc/en-us/articles/203325283-Crypt...
- samatman 4y agoDouble-spend attacks on ETC serve to demonstrate the effectiveness of proof of work. Forked minority chains aren't expected to be safe, and this is for sure reflected in the market value of the coin. Any time ETH miners want to gang up on ETC, they can.
- Gibbon1 4y agoJust remembered a couple of years ago I mentioned to a couple of friends that once the Feds zero interest rate policy ends cyrpto will collapse.
- eimrine 4y agoWhat is your definition of collapse? Is losing few tens percent of value enough for you to consider your prediction as worked?
- dharma1 4y agoI think that’s true for all speculative assets that have risen in value during a period of loose monetary policy
- rvz 4y ago
- bad_good_guy 4y agoImagine focusing on a minor typo as the main premise of your argument. How sad
- unixhero 4y agoPlease expand. This may be important.
- throwaway4good 4y agoI think the best criticism against crypto currency is that it is essentially “regulatory arbitrage”. Things are allowed inside crypto that is not allowed in the normal world of finance. Ie stable coins: promising people 20% on their savings account by running an obscured ponzi. Ie pump and dump. Ie insider information. Insiders on exchanges buying up coins they know are going to be listed. Etc etc. (And proof of work of course is the key enabler as it allows those who are running things to hide their identity.)
- gengiskush 4y ago"regulatory arbitrage" It is fancy way to call freedom. Yes it has been reduced to pump and dump scams but how is that different than the stock market?
- eimrine 4y ago> stable coins Are not a real cryptocurrency. > pump and dump Is absolutely a regular circumstance. Last what I remember is sawn wood situation on the very early 2022, afaik it is worldwide. I do not recommend you to buy right now a sawn wood from big stores before researching a market in your location, because some of big stores have been dumped after buying some big amounts of sawn wood on huge prices, and their warehouses are still full of this trade offer. > insider information. Insiders on exchanges buying up coins they know are going to be listed. All of that coins usually does something opposite to skyrocketing very soon after early birds have received a way to short their tokens (I do not have any counter-example). > proof of work of course is the key enabler as it allows those who are running things to hide their identity Some entities just don't have an identity, like an artificial intelligence. What if I want my pet AI to buy or change hosting without absolutely any of my participation or even knowing? (it is not my funds, the pet has earned it without my participation as well).
- quickthrower2 4y agowhat makes stablecoins not a real cryptocurrency? They are a currency stored on the blockchain
- gengiskush 4y agoIf it wasn't for the "potty police" banning drugs what use would people have for cryptocurrency? But the point is people have a use for it... When the author says "should die in a fire" he really means poor people drug users. The problem in his eyes is the drug users are now rich from cryptocurrency.
- Havoc 4y ago>help me make it die in a fire I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. If it really is that devoid of merit it'll die on its own. I also think it is a rather fundamental failure to see the big picture. Not efficient? Well neither was the Ford model T. Newer generations are getting better. Similarly somehow existing systems seem to get a free pass for things that are consider fatal flaws for crypto. Criminal enterprise? What do you think all the drug trade and sundry criminals use? Seashells? No USD. Systemic risk? Fed is printing trillions and history is littered with financial crises. Humans have managed to make everything from CDOs to tulips crash. Its not unique to crypto. Personally I think crypto is a 50/50 chance of working long term. The people certain it'll be a disaster seem just as silly as those certain it'll take over the world.
- eimrine 4y ago> Personally I think crypto is a 50/50 chance of working long term. Exactly as a chance of meeting a dinosaur on your street today? What a coincidence.
- 4y ago
- dandanua 4y ago"There is only one thing cryptocurrency is good for" https://youtu.be/J9nv0Ol-R5Q?t=1986 https://youtu.be/J9nv0Ol-R5Q?t=1986 It's from author's lecture.
- unixhero 4y agoIt is just a CS guy, my PhD level CS friends are equally bombastic and not necessarily always correct.
- JonathanBeuys 4y agoThe article starts out with: "The crypto world went into a full meltdown this week" I don't know. Look at a chart of Bitcoins price on a log scale: https://twitter.com/JonathanBeuys/status/1524810429884661761 https://twitter.com/JonathanBeuys/status/1524810429884661761 To me, it does not look any different then it has looked for the last 10 years. Its a slowing exponential growth with a certain volatility. Nothing seems to have changed in the last week.
- rco8786 4y agoThis is correct but the comment was about “the crypto world” which is no longer limited to BTC
- JonathanBeuys 4y agoBitcoin makes about half of cryptos market cap. Ethereum makes another quarter and looks similar. Tether makes another 10% or so and is at $0.998. I find it hard to imagine that whatever happens lower down on the list of crypto projects can move the needle enough so we can come to the conclusion that "the crypto world" as a whole is in a meltdown.
- cypress66 4y agoPeople decide on a narrative ("crypto is bad and a scam" in this case) and they will see the world in a distorted fashion in order to fullfil their narrative. So they see a significant drop in price, but completely within the bounds of previous drops, and they see it as full meltdown and the ponzi scheme popping, because that fits their narrative.
- polygamous_bat 4y agoAh yes, break out the log scale and the historical price. This is my favorite maneuver, break out the log scale and historical price chart to forget that a 20% dump over a week is just regular volatility for crypto.
- JonathanBeuys 4y ago
- ddjsn111 4y agoThe world needs decentralised assets. It’s the internet of money. Some are shitty, some are not. Monero and Algorand are two good examples. The latter carbon negative.
- aww_dang 4y agoThe core premise of these cryptocurrency haters is that they feel that their subjective value preferences are more valid than those of the market. This is a core tenet of central planning. It is plainly paternalistic. Ironically, it is the central planning of interest rates which created an environment ripe for speculative bubbles. It is the heavy regulation of all things financial which has burdened online transactions. If not for onerous regulatory requirements perhaps cryptocurrencies would not have been popularized. Then there are the obvious falsehoods and sloppy generalizations used to advance their argument. Not all cryptocurrencies are the same. Even if we accept their characterization of BTC as "wasteful" there are other options which are more efficient. Their solution, predictably enough is to create more regulations and prohibitions. It is a tone deaf lack of self awareness. All the worse when they celebrate themselves as authorities on the topic. Perhaps the interviewee is an expert on CS, but does that qualify him to centrally plan financial transactions? This is technocracy at its worst. A self appointed expert steps outside of his bounds to make wide sweeping proclamations. Then there are the obvious cultural factors. An institutional academic favors institutional and bureaucratic control over markets, disregards the value of market consensus and individual preferences? Cultural bias and group-think or not?
- ddjsn111 4y agoI completely agree.
- shkkmo 4y ago> The core premise of these cryptocurrency haters is that they feel that their subjective value preferences are more valid than those of the market. That is simply not true. As an early bitcoin supporter, my sentiment shifted against cryptocurrency as I worked with more and more companies that have been targeted by ransomware. I kept waiting to be able to pay for real things and instead I saw wave after wave of fraud, grift and extortion but no progress on being a usable currency. > It is the heavy regulation of all things financial which has burdened online transactions. Really? Online "non-cryptocurrency" transactions have outpaced cryptocurrency transactions by a massive amount. Cryptocurrency was a neat idea that failed to realize it's potential due to the complexity of operations in the real world. Instead it has become a cesspit of fraud, theft and self-deluding grifters that lie repeatedly to try to bring in more and more greater fools. There are still se cryptocurrency idealists out there, but it gets harder and harder to tell them from the grifters.
- gjs278 4y ago
- jimmydeans 4y ago
- Taryns 4y ago[dead]
- mypastself 4y agoSomewhat relatedly, I’ve been wondering for a while now why so many people here are so intensely, emotionally against this tech (and consequently why so many mediocre articles on the topic with emotionally charged titles are upvoted to the front page). Plenty of different arguments are offered by the commentariat, some of which have merit. But whether the stated reasons are environmental issues, political implications, scams, ransomware, or illicit trade, the one commonality seems anger and desire to ban and destroy all crypto. A commenter recently stated candidly that they simply feel envy. They’re bitter about their bro-type friends and acquaintances getting rich overnight and flaunting their wealth. It clicked for me that HN commenters are more likely to personally know such people and feel resentful towards them. That may sound like ad hominem, but I’m not addressing the arguments (many of which I agree with). I’m speculating about the reasons for the disproportionate level of ire directed against crypto on this forum, and personal resentment feels like a good candidate. The reason I even care is that I’m hoping to read (even if not always necessarily participate in) higher quality discussions on this topic. The tech is here whether we like it or not. It might fail horribly (as many here seem to be hoping), but what definitely won’t help are the “I hope this Ponzi scam dies soon” one-liners on almost every article on the topic.
- aww_dang 4y agoThe quality of these discussions could improve dramatically. At this point almost all of the possible arguments have been made. We are at the dead horse flogging point.
- kamranjon 4y agoI think, and this article is definitely an example, that people realize it is largely illegal under current law, but is simply not being enforced by regulatory agencies. So when people get upset, I don’t think it’s just old man nagging about the new generation, it is more them trying to warn people about traps they have seen time and time again but have been reigned in by regulation but for some reason are allowed to be setup in this new crypto space without oversight.
- yashg 4y ago>>getting rich overnight and flaunting their wealth Only a small fraction of early adopters became rich. Most of the suckers who joined the ponzi reading about these overnight riches have lost money. Like a typical ponzi.
- coldcode 4y agoYou can say the same thing about stocks, gold, bonds, commodities depending on what year you are in. Everything goes up and eventually down again. Oil futures even went below zero not that long ago, now the cash price is over $100 a barrel. I saw the crash in 1987 and yet here we are, at all time highs recently. Crypto of course has less economic meaning as it's just bits, but anything that is traded goes up and down in value, even pointless things like baseball cards. Value is whatever people will pay today for something hoping it either goes up in value or provides them with some benefit (like a house). Complaining that crypto is stupid is fine, but lots of things in history were stupidly valued (tulips, beanie babies, bored apes) and eventually the market did or will change. Crypto is worth whatever people will pay for it. It's not inherently evil.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago> but lots of things in history were stupidly valued (tulips, beanie babies, bored apes) and eventually the market did or will change Only one of those things requires enough energy input to drive a massive V8 Landrover for a week every single time you try to exchange it, and it's not tulips or beanie babies.
- bombcar 4y agoAt least with commodities someone somewhere eventually is actually consuming them - this acts as a stabilizing force eventually even if bubbles and crashes can occur.
- danans 4y ago> down in value, even pointless things like baseball cards Baseball cards that have any value aren't pointless. They are kind of historical artifact, and are traded like artifacts or antiques. They have value as long as enough people place value on baseball history. Newly created baseball cards are effectively worthless, and a vanishingly small percentage will ever have any value. Crypto has no cultural value like that. There is no sentimental value attached to it. Eventually in the future when nobody cares about it remembers what baseball is, the cards will have no value, but the fact is that value today comes from both their scarcity and the ownership of a piece of history.
- sudden_dystopia 4y agoYea, sorry but not going to trust proponents of MMT on economic issues. Yes crypto is mostly a scam. I do think that btc is different though.
- block_dagger 4y agoMost of crypto is trash. However, Bitcoin will live for a very long time and take on appropriately high value. I don’t understand the folks who don’t see its incredible worth as a store of value. It doesn’t need to produce anything tangible to be valuable. Indeed it’s more valuable as a pure medium it seems. That’s the point.
- ephbit 4y ago> WEAVER: Yes. So let’s take the cost of a transaction. The cost of a transaction in cryptocurrency systemically is the amount being used to protect it. I could build a system that would have the same throughput as Bitcoin, three to seven transactions per second, but with a centralized trusted entity. In fact, not even a centralized trusted entity. Ten trusted entities, only six of which need to be honest, because I use a majority vote system. I could do it on ten computers that look like this, that would burn as much power as a light bulb. Okay, so Mr Weaver can conjure some "ten trusted entities" by simply wishing them into existence. Either he doesn't understand why one cannot simply create a "trusted entity" out of thin air .. which would mean, he's not actually an expert who anyone should listen to .. or he consciously makes a lazy attempt at formulating an argument that superficially sounds reasonable, while not having any substance.
- civil_engineer 4y agoYou could substitute “trusted entities” for “banks”. Get ten banks on board, buy them each a raspberry pi, and you are up and running.
- seanhunter 4y agoHow do get the banks on board? Remember you only have the energy of a lightbulb between all of them and no way to pay them without incurring structural transaction fees of the sort the FA is claiming are solvable by this solution. Also remember the banks actively distrust each other and spend literally all day every day in every one of their businesses trying to beat each other in every possible legal/ethical way (and also sometimes some illegal/unethical ones). It seems somewhat implausible that out of the goodness of their collective hearts they will all decide to run your raspberry pi, play nice with one another and do the right thing. Some problems are super easy to handwave away in theory but actually pretty difficult to solve in practise.
- ephbit 4y agoYea .. no. I have a hard time believing that you're actually trying to understand, which kind of trust the people who created Bitcoin meant and why they thought it's important. Just claiming banks are in that sense trustworthy either neglects that banks exist in states and can be influenced or is plain naive. We live in a world where states and central banks are constantly trying to achieve goals by changing money creation. No matter if you see that as problematic or not, you'll hardly deny that currencies are subject to extreme pressures from economic actors (governments, banks, societies, businesses, ..). Therefore claiming that banks can simply be "trusted" to withstand these pressures (by strictly enacting some agreed upon policy) is a bit like closing your eyes on the real world situation of currencies.
- uwuemu 4y agoI'll do you one better > Why All Of Silicon Valley Should Die in a Fire Just an extension of the original... and just as dumb. Also, I get the general sentiment on this site is CRYPTO BAD, mut can we please not jam the front page with links like this? What will be the next "why all x should die in a fire"?
- notacoward 4y ago> Why All Of Silicon Valley Should Die in a Fire If they provide arguments, even (especially?) if those arguments are refutable, it might be worth reading. There's a lot to criticize about ad-supported Silicon Valley, and even VC-supported Silicon Valley. What's not worth reading is blithe dismissals - like yours - that don't make any argument at all but consist purely of tone-policing.
- ur-whale 4y agoObligatory: https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/ https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/
- projektfu 4y agoThe disaster has already occurred, it just hasn't been felt yet. The disaster of 2000 was not the crash of the tech stocks, it was the previous year of pouring people's savings into a fire pit. What would it have meant for the economy to keep all those companies inflated? Surely only a bigger disaster.
- jrm4 4y agoWhile the vast majority of today's anti-crypto articles are generally accurate, always bet against articles like this, in favor of first principles. "Anonymous-ish cash, but on the internet" is a very attractive proposition. I'd also add to that "Locking up your money to get more money later" is as well. So much so that I'd strongly bet in favor of "people figure out how to make it more efficient, safer, and less destructive" against "It's just going to fail and go away."
- polygamous_bat 4y ago> Locking up your money to get more money later Yes, there is a very simple way of offering that. Unfortunately it's currently illegal to do so in most places outside of crypto, where all of a sudden it becomes kosher as long as you can keep it wrapped in enough technobabble.
- jrm4 4y agoI mean, yes, this describes "ponzi," but also nearly literally all "investment." One may not like "Capitalism," I suppose, but yeah.
- Patrol8394 4y agoI can move $ in less then a day and for free just using my bank. Now, try to do the same with a stable coin running on ETH … and check the fees . To me it does not feel innovation, but rather going backwards.
- charcircuit 4y ago>you cannot store cryptocurrency on an internet-connected computer. Because what will happen is, if your computer ever gets compromised, all your money gets stolen and there’s nothing you can do about it. This is the point of having a hardware wallet. Someone has to push a physical button in the real world to sign a transaction. >And [ransomware] only exists because people can pay in Bitcoin. The concept of ransoms predates cryptocurrency and would still exist without it. >And my gain is not just the difference between what I bought it for and what somebody else bought it for, but that plus the benefit of all the dividends and interest. Stocks aren't guaranteed to just go up. If your stocks even pay dividends that might not even cover your losses. >So the stock market and the bond market are a positive-sum game. The stock market isn't positive sum. Someone is going to be holding the bag when a company goes out of business. >but [Tether] does have the potential for bank runs causing collapse, because it’s unbacked. This is false. See https://tether.to/en/transparency/ https://tether.to/en/transparency/ >Tether tokens, loans them to their big colleagues in the cryptocurrency space See the above link. Their reserves aren't made up those kinds of loans. >The cost of a transaction in cryptocurrency systemically is the amount being used to protect it. This isn't true. If I charge $100 per transaction that doesn't mean that $100 of that goes towards protecting it. >So let’s do programs that cannot be updated that handle mone This isn't true. Smart contacts get updated all of the time. >There’s no mechanism to fix problems if they occur. There’s no undo button. In fact, there’s often no way to upgrade at all. This is just plain wrong. You can even make upgrades which are delayed that you can potentially cancel to prevent from being applied.
- kkfx 4y agoMy own personal opinion on cryptos is that they are a tentative by some GAFAM to overtake banks at their own game, considering that as actual "fiat" money cryptos are "virtual values, substrate of anything" witch appear to be free but due to their mechanics are bound to network and computing power witch means to some IT-enabled subjects, so in practice as free as fiat currencies these days for their "end users", and "a bit more free" for "real owners". However as any "money" concept rooted on "money is the value" instead of "money is just an unit of measure of some substrate" are no more scam than actual currencies, should face the same fate anyway.
- notacoward 4y agoSo far I've seen three variants of the "he just doesn't understand" argument in comments, including the currently top rated comment, and the day is still young. I bet there will be more, because it has become crypto advocates' favorite tactic to negate real argument. Unfortunately, it's an appeal to (false) authority. Why should anyone believe that the crypto advocate - even without considering the taint of self interest - knows more about the subject than someone like Nick Weaver or David Rosenthal who has a decades long record of actually solving closely related problems? At best, with only a few exceptions, the advocate is a relatively new programmer in a completely different specialty. Often they're not even technical at all. Where's this authority that's supposed to override rational arguments (even if those could be countered)? At least people like those I've named don't rely on authority and take the time to provide real discussion-worthy points as well. This is supposed to be a rational reality-based community. There should be zero tolerance for the "just doesn't understand" trope, especially when someone doesn't even identify (let alone explain) what it is that their target doesn't understand. It's blithe dismissal, not curious conversation, and at least nominally (according to the guidelines) not what the site is supposed to be about.
- beej71 4y agoI get the environmental argument about proof of work, but aren't other consensus mechanisms addressing this?
- DennisP 4y agoMost of this is old hat but there's one claim I thought was interesting and decided to check, and it's laughably wrong: > We’re talking [a measurable percentage] of the world’s electricity consumption, most of that has not been paid for. So the mining companies for the most part have been taking the cryptocurrency and borrowing against the cryptocurrency that they create, rather than sell it, because the market’s actually very thin. So supposedly, the markets are too thin to support the miners actually selling their earnings to pay their power bills. Let's check the top two against 24-hour volume on coinmarketcap: BTC volume: 1M BTC BTC issuance: 6.25 BTC every 10 minutes, or 900 BTC in 24 hours, or 0.09% of the trading volume. ETH volume: 8.5M ETH ETH issuance: 2 ETH every 15 seconds, or 11,520 ETH in 24 hours, or 0.14% of the trading volume. I don't think the miners have any trouble selling their earnings for fiat.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- foolzcrow 4y ago