disruptalot

12 ms·

61.
by disruptalot 5y ago
Wow this is perhaps the best critique of Bitcoin yet. In summary, Bitcoin is bad because it allows money laundered using the existing financial system to flow into it. Forget the property, energy and hardware providers for accepting illicit
62.
by disruptalot 5y ago
Your arguments are just a whole load of strawmen. You don't address the central point. Bitcoin exists, and banks don't do it what it does. Hence the energy cost comparisons as rough and silly as you make them are not a conclusion
63.
by disruptalot 5y ago
You only need to look around for a moment to find an example. There are people living under governments that don't allow their citizens access to the global financial system (i.e. capital controls) and are often living in high inflatio
64.
by disruptalot 5y ago
Central banks don't do fixed supply money. Investment banks don't do payments and financial products that don't involve a middleman. Bitcoin is a censorship resistant, neutral money and payment network. Banks don't do th
65.
by disruptalot 5y ago
Why should anyone pay for your consumption and values when you aren't willing to pay for others?
66.
by disruptalot 5y ago
This is one of those "Freakonomics" type ideas. On the surface this sounds like bitcoin's PoW use will simply stop. It's actually the entire opposite. When governments ban it, they go after sizeable, identifiable organiz
67.
by disruptalot 5y ago
The issuance is exponentially decreasing every 4 years. If you're a miner and have hardware investment, increasing your issuance contrary to the expectation of the market is essentially taxing the holders. It's besides the point t
68.
by disruptalot 5y ago
A system being open to abuse is to an extent a property of the system.
69.
by disruptalot 5y ago
Of all the years in which you could make this argument, this year is probably the worst. In the "well functioning democracy" U.S. You have: - Mistrust in institutions - An insane asset inflation bubble fueled by the biggest fiat p
70.
by disruptalot 5y ago
Nope. The point of consensus is that when you opt in to rules, they don't change under you. Who has the highest amount of power in Bitcoin, and why haven't they done anything, for example increase the issuance?
71.
by disruptalot 5y ago
It's not designed around mistrust, it's designed to not require trust. There's a big difference. Why would you want trust where it's not needed? Trust is a barrier, not a feature.
72.
by disruptalot 5y ago
You forget the payment network without a third party.
73.
by disruptalot 5y ago
Now imagine comparing child pornography (and other things) in mediums before the internet and after. These comparisons are not useful for exponential, paradigm changing technology.
74.
by disruptalot 5y ago
The only reason I mention that you should mind your own energy uses is that you seem concerned about externalities and distraught bitcoin is doing the opposite of your thesis. Discuss away but it's not working. Your best bet is to regu
75.
by disruptalot 5y ago
> What you cannot verify is how much you can exchange it for. Yes the price of assets are decided in a free market. So what point are you making exactly? Clearly in every other aspect, bitcoin is superior. In fact, bitcoin is one of the
76.
by disruptalot 5y ago
And the exact same proposition for any use of energy. That you don't find it useful does not mean it is not. Mind your own uses of energy and leave the market to decide what is really valuable.
77.
by disruptalot 5y ago
The property you're asserting is physicality not reality or usefulness.
78.
by disruptalot 5y ago
That's strange, how do you know it's real and you own it? With my bitcoin, I can verify that I received it and that no one except myself has access to that specific portion of the supply. And then I can even transact it whenever I
79.
by disruptalot 5y ago
So I take it you are not willing to accept bitcoin for free since it's not "real and economically useful"? Commodities don't have a fixed supply, they are not transportable, you can't actually own them. You can&#x27
80.
by disruptalot 6y ago
I should clarify, Ethereum isn't merely "Blockchain technology", it's a more programmable Bitcoin (with other trade offs of course). In that sense, it's useful for the reasons you mentioned. The point applies more t
81.
by disruptalot 6y ago
"Blockchain" is close to useless unless it is coupled with being public, permissionless, borderless among other things. The companies that jumped on this "Blockchain" "DLT" nonsense bandwagon to this day do not
82.
by disruptalot 6y ago
I've been hearing this for 10 years straight. Thus far the only successful examples of Blockchain technology have been based on digital currencies and Bitcoin has done nothing but continue it's success. On the other hand, there is
83.
by disruptalot 6y ago
> It is not comparable to hashing random numbers for proof of work levels of useless. Bitcoin exists because there is no alternative decentralised, self sovereign currency. PoW exists because there is no other method to achieve that. It
84.
by disruptalot 6y ago
Bitcoin, nor how it's implemented is useless. You just don't understand it. And it doesn't matter, you don't have to. People value and understand the world differently. Is there really an objective definition of useless?
85.
by disruptalot 6y ago
The reader will find dozens of suggestion in this thread about how coin X is more "efficient". Note that efficiency would mean producing the same properties but with less resources. Not merely using less resources. While experimen
86.
by disruptalot 6y ago
Maybe with the simplistic perspective that Bitcoin has a value that you can calculate. Energy usecases are worth what energy they use. Energy exists in a mostly free market and that's the best way to determine value. Everything else is
87.
by disruptalot 6y ago
That they hold Bitcoin instead of accepting USD denominated in BTC? That's possibly the most legitimizing development in the past few years. One of the most used critical points about Bitcoin has been that it has not been suitable as a
88.
by disruptalot 6y ago
Unbelievable. Is it really worth boiling the oceans? It's critical that we move to text only internet that has a per site cap of 100kb. That would cut the energy usage by 99% with virtually no difference to the experience.
89.
by disruptalot 6y ago
I think you'll find both USD and the internet are much better vehicles for that.
90.
by disruptalot 6y ago
Which is an entirely subjective position. You could argue that porn is not only useless, but also harmful. This is the same logical question for any use of anything.

More ›