3 ms·
>This is your first mistake: the traditional banking system does not have a security model predicated on the ability to waste power. Bitcoin does, and it’s dyna
by jakupovic 3y ago
>This is your first mistake: the traditional banking system does not have a security model predicated on the ability to waste power. Bitcoin does, and it’s dynamic so there’s no way to waste less power which isn’t explicitly ceding control.
This doesn't make sense. The power is used to secure the network. Your first mistake here is you must think of Bitcoin as useless and any use of power is a waste. Just to help you, if BTC was useless it would be worth $0 traditional banking dollars, as this is not the case your whole premise is a waste.
- acdha 3y agoYes, Bitcoin uses proof of wasted computation as its security mechanism. That’s why it’s widely recognized as an inefficient design because you can just look at the alternatives which are faster, more secure, or both and do not require the energy equivalent of a fair-sized country to operate a database. It’s a great software engineering case study: the algorithm is a neat solution to a problem that almost nobody has, so while it’s cool as an intellectual exercise it’s failed to see much adoption even as it passes the middle of its second decade because it’s not cost effective for most people. It’s kind of like the idea of a supersonic airliner: a neat engineering challenge but a failure in the marketplace because 99.9% of people don’t need the problem it solves desperately enough to pay so much more.
- jakupovic 3y agoBITCOIN ETF MIC DROP