3 ms·

Comparing BTC to beef is the wrong comparison: we should be comparing BTC to USD. Over 95% of the USD money supply exists in digital form only; while there's n

by mikece 4y ago

Comparing BTC to beef is the wrong comparison: we should be comparing BTC to USD. Over 95% of the USD money supply exists in digital form only; while there's no proof-of-work element to creating new USD the electricity to run all of the servers at all of the banks, Federal Reserve, Treasury department, etc is non-trivial. The physical protection of the money supply (Secret Service, FBI) also has massive cost and impact. And the ultimate environmental impact is the "full faith and credit" of the united States governement -- which translates to the US military-industrial complex and the threat of force of arms -- causes far more environmental damage. (And yes, we do use our military to protect the USD: we killed two heads of state primarily because they wanted to price their oil in something other than USD. Had they succeeded that would have killed the petrodollar system.)

samketchup 4y ago
Well said fellow coin collector
iLoveOncall 4y ago
tl;dr: 1 bitcoin transaction consumes as much energy as 1,000 Visa transactions. Or maybe it's 10,000, can't remember.
- mgamache 4y ago
  I think you mean... tl;dr; bitcoin is less wasteful and promotes global peace.
- taolegal 4y ago
  And 1 bitcoin transaction can easily be turned into 1,000-infinite visa transactions. It's called the lightning network.
  - EFreethought 4y ago
    How is the Lightning Network supposed to help? Bitcoin advocates say that the BTC network has to be slow to be secure and decentralized. If you start putting transactions on a second blockchain, don't you lose all the security/validation of the BTC blockchain?
    - Quindecillion 4y ago
      It's a trade off. Think of the difference between paying the deposit on a house vs. buying a coffee. Need a large transaction to settle with a high degree of security and finality, but "slowly" (i.e. ~10 minutes)? Do it on-chain. Need a small transaction to settle instantly and cheaply, but you trade that for some security and finality? Do it on the Lightning Network. Similar trade offs already exist in traditional finance. See inter-bank transfers and things like FedWire compared to payment networks like Visa and Mastercard. Some of those inter-banks transfers can take days to weeks to settle with finality and can be expensive. Bitcoin can settle in ~10 minutes relatively cheaply. Credit card payment networks charge a 1.5-3% fee on each transaction. Transactions on LN are a few sats or fractions of a sat... practically free. Automated micro-transactions are now practical with LN [1]. Also, the Lightning Network isn't a blockchain. [1] https://lightninglabs.substack.com/p/streaming-sats-why-bitcoin-is-not https://lightninglabs.substack.com/p/streaming-sats-why-bitc...
    - taolegal 4y ago
      The point is that BTC network is for secure & decentralized final settlement. That's really the most important aspect of a sound money. For daily transactions Lightning bundles those transactions (as long as the channel exists) into a live tally based in a single BTC transaction. The beauty is that the Lightning protocol even uses the BTC protocol to coordinate that live tally over a channel, without having to commit it to the blockchain at every update. You don't lose security much, in fact you actually end up gaining privacy.

by mikece 4y ago

samketchup 4y ago

Well said fellow coin collector

iLoveOncall 4y ago

tl;dr: 1 bitcoin transaction consumes as much energy as 1,000 Visa transactions. Or maybe it's 10,000, can't remember.

mgamache 4y ago
I think you mean... tl;dr; bitcoin is less wasteful and promotes global peace.
taolegal 4y ago
And 1 bitcoin transaction can easily be turned into 1,000-infinite visa transactions. It's called the lightning network.
- EFreethought 4y ago
  How is the Lightning Network supposed to help? Bitcoin advocates say that the BTC network has to be slow to be secure and decentralized. If you start putting transactions on a second blockchain, don't you lose all the security/validation of the BTC blockchain?
  - Quindecillion 4y ago
    It's a trade off. Think of the difference between paying the deposit on a house vs. buying a coffee. Need a large transaction to settle with a high degree of security and finality, but "slowly" (i.e. ~10 minutes)? Do it on-chain. Need a small transaction to settle instantly and cheaply, but you trade that for some security and finality? Do it on the Lightning Network. Similar trade offs already exist in traditional finance. See inter-bank transfers and things like FedWire compared to payment networks like Visa and Mastercard. Some of those inter-banks transfers can take days to weeks to settle with finality and can be expensive. Bitcoin can settle in ~10 minutes relatively cheaply. Credit card payment networks charge a 1.5-3% fee on each transaction. Transactions on LN are a few sats or fractions of a sat... practically free. Automated micro-transactions are now practical with LN [1]. Also, the Lightning Network isn't a blockchain. [1] https://lightninglabs.substack.com/p/streaming-sats-why-bitcoin-is-not https://lightninglabs.substack.com/p/streaming-sats-why-bitc...
  - taolegal 4y ago
    The point is that BTC network is for secure & decentralized final settlement. That's really the most important aspect of a sound money. For daily transactions Lightning bundles those transactions (as long as the channel exists) into a live tally based in a single BTC transaction. The beauty is that the Lightning protocol even uses the BTC protocol to coordinate that live tally over a channel, without having to commit it to the blockchain at every update. You don't lose security much, in fact you actually end up gaining privacy.