3 ms·

I'm not attacking Alex de Vries as a person; just showing how his position makes him suspect of bias. https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-energy/ https://www.lyna

I'm not attacking Alex de Vries as a person; just showing how his position makes him suspect of bias. https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-energy/ https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-energy/ "For those reasons, whether Bitcoin continues to be successful or fails in terms of broader adoption, there’s no risk of the network using too much energy in the grand scheme of things. By any metric, it’s a rounding error as far as global consumption energy is concerned, with a sizeable chunk of its energy usage consisting of sustainable or otherwise wasted energy. People focusing heavily on the environmental “E” side of ESG as it relates to Bitcoin often overlook the “SG” component- social and governance. At the end of the day, I consider Bitcoin to be one of the most ESG assets around, just not in the corporate sanitised conception that the term ESG is often used in."

Nursie 4y ago
Except that's more wishful thinking nonsense - we know it's not a rounding error, because it uses around half a percent of world electricity generation (which your source tries to obscure by looking at all energy, not just power), and we know that that's not all sourced from clean sources - see all the links above. You have to be kidding about SG - it's the most toxic community on the planet, its governance is absent, and the whole ecosystem is rife with fraud and crime. That's hi-fucking-larious. > I'm not attacking Alex de Vries as a person; just showing how his position makes him suspect of bias. That's the very definition of an ad-hominem attack, attacking the standing of the speaker, not the speech.