[mabbo]

Because bitcoin is solving a problem that isn't a real problem by introducing a dozen more problems the existing system has solved.

Bitcoin decentralizes currency and leaves no one entity in control. Hurrah, the government can't stop you from moving money as you see fit. Except that most of the time, the government is stopping people from doing things that were made illegal for very good reasons. Money laundering of proceeds of crime, terrorist financing, tax evasion. You can debate all day about whether taxes are inherently evil, but right now the law says they are legal and you've gotta pay them. Saying "No worries man, I've got a NEW currency that the government can't stop" doesn't make it not a crime.

All the while, it's not actually free. We're burning huge amounts of energy to do mining, and the costs have to be passed on to someone. Miners get free BTC for mining, but that's a closed system- someone eventually must pay real currency for that energy being used. And it's getting expensive given the number of miners. (Plus, a lot of them are China which is using coal as it's primary energy source, which is killing people from pollution!)

And finally, there's no inflation/deflation controls. A currency's utility is increased by it's stability. Not knowing if my BTC will double in price or drop by half in the next 2 weeks means every day is a gamble. If this were my only currency, I'd be terrified about buying groceries.

Oh, and let's not forget that the huge spike in BTC prices in the last few years were found likely to have been caused by manipulation.

I love crypto and think bitcoin/blockchains are a really neat technology. But I just wish they weren't here, in the real world, because they seem to be a net-loss for the world, and a Ponzi scheme.

Edit after getting a coffee: ... okay, that was a bit of a rant...

[aeternus]

Very valid criticisms, but they do not apply in all cases.

In terms of reducing governmental control, sure this isn't much of a problem if your government is altruistic. Governments do not have a great long-term track record here. In Venezuela for example, many would say Bitcoin is solving a very real problem. You're right about its ability to be used for illegal activities, however the same could be said for most technology: encryption, the internet.

In terms of energy, this can be a criticism of almost all currencies and stores of value. This real-world expenditure is much of what gives it value, especially early on. Gold is valuable because of the difficulty in mining/acquiring it. Even national currencies are valuable due to the resources committed by their military, or the military's of that nation's allies. People might argue it is GDP, but GDP does not mean much if you cannot defend it.

Manipulation and price swings are a valid concern, but no other currency is immune to those either. Silver for example has had very widespread manipulation in the past. Silver and gold have probably still been a net-positive.

[mabbo]

> You're right about its ability to be used for illegal activities, however the same could be said for most technology: encryption, the internet.

Bitcoins primary purposes today consist of: 1. buying bitcoins in the hope that they're worth more tomorrow, and 2. using bitcoins to buy illegal drugs on the internet. And the only reason #2 is declining is because so many people are doing #1 that it's getting too expensive in terms of fees to use it for #2.

> In terms of energy, this can be a criticism of almost all currencies and stores of value.

You're comparing fixed, one-time capital costs with ongoing variable costs. Transferring gold from one human to another involved handing it over. No costs there. Transferring bitcoins requires an increasing amount of energy as the rules make it harder and harder to complete a block.

> Manipulation and price swings are a valid concern, but no other currency is immune to those either.

When was the last time your USD bank account suddenly became worth twice as much, or half as much? Central banks can utilize price control mechanisms to carefully maintain inflation rates. Most aim for 2% per year, and most hit their targets pretty accurately. Bitcoin cannot offer that.

[aeternus]

True there is a lot of speculation today, and transaction fees are much too high to use for everyday expenses. I would say store-of-value is a valid use-case though. The ability of an individual to store wealth in their brain is a useful property. Mostly for those attempting to escape oppressive governments, or "extractive" political institutions.

The transferring of bitcoin is not what is energy intensive. The energy is expended as a "vote" on which of many possible forks should be trusted. Gold definitely has this expenditure as well, military's are often required to secure it, and large amounts of energy and expenditure are required to discover and mine it.

USD is one of the most stable currencies in the world, and the fed has done a good job of maintaining stability. You're right that Bitcoin is no where near as stable as USD, but it is more stable than the currencies of some other countries. There are still ways for a central bank to maintain interest rates even if Bitcoin is widely used. Bitcoin does not prevent fractional reserve banking.

[rishirishi]

"Untrustworthy governments manipulating currencies" appears to be the problem that decentralized digital currencies are supposedly solving. Instead of this indirection, how about addressing the root problem? Replacing that untrustworthy government with a trustworthy one, changing incentives, or identifying new forms of government/control.

[verdverm]

We are likely (hopefully) near an inflection point for our current rule systems and their ability to manage today's complexities.

See: Rules for a Flat World

[aeternus]

It would probably be better to address the root problem. Unfortunately replacing governments has a long history of being a very violent and bloody ordeal.