3 ms·

There is a vast amount of legitimate use on the Bitcoin blockchain. Even companies that have a clear incentive to find criminal use of Bitcoin can only find any

There is a vast amount of legitimate use on the Bitcoin blockchain. Even companies that have a clear incentive to find criminal use of Bitcoin can only find anywhere between 1 and 4% possibly criminial transaction use. That is considerably lower than estimates for the USD or EUR. Comparing the energy usage of a single global industry to a mid-size country is dumb. All of this fud originates from digiconomist, which also has an incentive to keep spewing this garbage. You can find a vast amount of refutations on this, but the one by Nic Carter is good: https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/03/05/the-frustrating-maddening-all-consuming-bitcoin-energy-debate/ https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/03/05/the-frustrating...

vesinisa 4y ago
Your source does not show how the numbers on Bitcoin's energy use published by Digiconomist are "garbage" and "FUD". In fact, the energy use of these blockchain networks is subject of multiple academic studies, like [1], [2] and [3] (just the top of a quick google). They all come to the same conclusion: these networks require mind-boggling amounts of electricity to operate by design. It is not garbage - it's an inherent fact of cryptocurrency. The article you linked instead makes the argument that the Bitcoin network will use less energy in the future, because there will be less coins issued for miners. This argument is easily refuted by that the risk of a 50% attack will always require defending the network with stupid large electricity use. The verifier incentives will just shift from mining proceeds to even more ridiculous transaction costs. [1]: https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index [2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214629618301750 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22146... [3]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343517300015 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S18773...
jfk13 4y ago
> There is a vast amount of legitimate use on the Bitcoin blockchain What kind of legitimate use? If the answer primarily boils down to "cryptocurrency speculation, wash trading, and attempts at get-rich-quick schemes", I won't be all that impressed.
Cederfjard 4y ago
> > Lacking viable uses outside of the criminal underworld and speculation You gave numbers for criminal activity, but the original claim also included speculation. If you take that into account as well, how much do you have left then? If Bitcoin remains primarily a vehicle for transferring wealth from new investors to incumbent holders by building hype, is it really a benefit to society?
- once_inc 4y ago
  Sure, there's speculation there. Probably a significant amount. That doesn't mean Bitcoin is a vehicle for transferring wealth from new investors to incumbent investors. There are quite a few people that aren't selling. There are quite a few people using it to get out of monetary experiments by governments. There are quite a few people using it to send money without intermediaries to family in the third world. I can't give you specific numbers, because the system isn't built to provide them. This is, in my opinion, a feature.

vesinisa 4y ago

Your source does not show how the numbers on Bitcoin's energy use published by Digiconomist are "garbage" and "FUD". In fact, the energy use of these blockchain networks is subject of multiple academic studies, like [1], [2] and [3] (just the top of a quick google). They all come to the same conclusion: these networks require mind-boggling amounts of electricity to operate by design. It is not garbage - it's an inherent fact of cryptocurrency. The article you linked instead makes the argument that the Bitcoin network will use less energy in the future, because there will be less coins issued for miners. This argument is easily refuted by that the risk of a 50% attack will always require defending the network with stupid large electricity use. The verifier incentives will just shift from mining proceeds to even more ridiculous transaction costs. [1]: https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index [2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214629618301750 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22146... [3]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343517300015 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S18773...

jfk13 4y ago

> There is a vast amount of legitimate use on the Bitcoin blockchain What kind of legitimate use? If the answer primarily boils down to "cryptocurrency speculation, wash trading, and attempts at get-rich-quick schemes", I won't be all that impressed.

Cederfjard 4y ago

> > Lacking viable uses outside of the criminal underworld and speculation You gave numbers for criminal activity, but the original claim also included speculation. If you take that into account as well, how much do you have left then? If Bitcoin remains primarily a vehicle for transferring wealth from new investors to incumbent holders by building hype, is it really a benefit to society?

once_inc 4y ago
Sure, there's speculation there. Probably a significant amount. That doesn't mean Bitcoin is a vehicle for transferring wealth from new investors to incumbent investors. There are quite a few people that aren't selling. There are quite a few people using it to get out of monetary experiments by governments. There are quite a few people using it to send money without intermediaries to family in the third world. I can't give you specific numbers, because the system isn't built to provide them. This is, in my opinion, a feature.