Both > other cryptocurrencies which function better than Bitcoin in every aspect and > Block lattice tech has been around for seven years now, utterly dispro

Both > other cryptocurrencies which function better than Bitcoin in every aspect and > Block lattice tech has been around for seven years now, utterly disproving that statement are false statements of fact. To date, there have been no alternatives to bitcoin that are functioning better than bitcoin, because Bitcoin remains the most secure, most scarce digital asset. All other chains attempt to improve certain metrics at a cost of either decreasing decentralisation, increasing attack vectors/attack surface, or increasing the codebase complexity significantly. > "People used to think the only way to enforce scarcity was by burning their planet to a fucking cinder, lol" This is also an often debated point. The fact is that this is a multi-faceted discussion with a vast array of nuance and arguments to and fro. Yes, bitcoin is being mined on coal energy, also yes: Bitcoin is being used to reduce the amount of methane emissions. Simply framing this as a "bitcoin uses energy" discussion and not a "bitcoin mining leads to carbon emissions" which is what the discussion actually should be is reason enough to scratch yourself on the head whether you are actively pushing biased arguments. And yes, this discussion (Bitcoin mining leads to carbon emissions) is something most Bitcoiners have discussed and researched to a point where they can comfortably back this concept.