3 ms·

Common misconception. Crypto-currency mining is not wasteful compared to other financial activities: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths#Bitcoin_mining_is_a_waste_

• lukifer 13y ago
  I like to think in terms of the energy wasted by all the bank employees driving to work every day. If even 10% of those made redundant by a distributed banking system were able to start working from home doing other things, I'd guess it was a net win.
  • sentenza 13y ago
    Sorry to drag out old slashdot nomenclature, but what you are saying is: 1. Use cryptocurrency 2. Fire 10% of bank employees 3. ??? 4. Profit! I am no expert on banking, but I'd be really surprised if 10% of banking employees were doing things that become unneccessary with cryptocurrencies. Most steps that can be automated are automated already, and the number of sysadmins certainly won't decrease. That is, here in Europe. I've heared that there is some inefficient weirdness going on with "wire transfers" in the US, but that is not the case here.
    • lukifer 13y ago
      Actually, what I said (or implied) is: fire most bank employees, all of whom will end up doing something more useful, and 10% of whom will no longer need to drive to work every day. :)
• drzaiusapelord 13y ago
  Except banks hire employees, pay taxes, provide a service, build ATMs, offer lines of credit, provide consumer protections, etc. Thats 100% different than neckbeards going through garbage dumps looking for lost coins and kids buying GPUs with daddy's credit card for bragging points. Shame this isn't just arbitrary math instead of contributing to something like folding@home.
  • mrb 13y ago
    You are under another misconception: the broken window fallacy. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window Creating/sustaining an inefficient financial industry [1] is a bad use of society's resources. Just like breaking a mirror for the sake of giving work to the repair man is a net loss to society. [1] I claim "inefficiency" compared to crypto-currencies. Example: transferring $150 million via Bitcoin uses less resources than doing it via the legacy financial system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706
    • drzaiusapelord 13y ago
      Providing services is not "broken windows." Bitcoin isn't going to get me a mortgage or a business loan. Or have a real live person to yell at when I have an issue. Or provide a level of consumer protection for me. Or give me an entity to sue when I feel wronged. >Creating/sustaining an inefficient financial industry [1] is a bad use of society's resources. Not only are you being reductionist and naive, that statement is 100% opinion. Its not "inefficient" to have banks and the services they provide. That's just your pie-in-the-sky take here.
      • mrb 13y ago
        I am not calling all financial services inefficient/useless. Obviously there is value in providing loans, customer support, etc. But at least some activities of the traditional financial sector can be made more efficient by crypto-currencies, hence the value they provide to society. (Again I refer you to this one example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706)
    • kaonashi 13y ago
      The broken window fallacy is itself fallacious in that it is often used with an implicit assumption that all economic choices are zero-sum. Some times you can fix your windows and make shoes. That isn't to say you should break your windows on purpose. That's just stupid.