[arcticbull]

Sadly it’s the opposite of a joke. 1 bitcoin transaction is 607kWh (or 288kgCO2 and 85g of ewaste). And the more efficient technology gets the less efficient bitcoin gets. Patently absurd.

95% of volume is fraudulent, and decentralized and trustless means that’s an intentional, irrevocable part of the system. Being able to circumvent international sanctions and pay terrorists is a feature. North Korea has been accumulating a large stockpile. More than 50% of hash power is concentrated in 3 mining pools in the PRC.

The higher the price goes the more you have to pay miners for the same job. Just maintaining the price requires $14.4M in new money each day to pay the miners. If BTC goes to $80K each you’d need $144M in new money per day to pay the miners.

And it solves no actual problems people have. Sweet joke fam. I feel like I’m watching the liberty reserve all over again.

[darawk]

> And the more efficient technology gets the less efficient bitcoin gets.

Incorrect. The technology getting more efficient does not make Bitcoin less efficient. You probably didn't actually think through this point, because it's nonsensical.

> 95% of volume is fraudulent, and decentralized and trustless means that’s an intentional, irrevocable part of the system.

95% of volume on exchanges that nobody pays any attention to anyway. Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Bittrex, etc all have completely legitimate volume numbers.

> The higher the price goes the more you have to pay miners for the same job.

This is only true as long as new bitcoins are still being minted. And it's also only true if the rate of increase in the price outstrips the decrease in the minting rate.

> And it solves no actual problems people have. Sweet joke fam. I feel like I’m watching the liberty reserve all over again.

Ok. Don't buy any then. Meanwhile, people living under repressive and fiscally irresponsible governments will continue to use it to protect their wealth, as they have been doing.

[arcticbull]

Hahahahhahahahaha

[darawk]

I'll take that as the confirmation that it is that you have no response, because you don't actually know what you're talking about.

[arcticbull]

That reply ended up in the wrong place and now I can’t amend it my bad.

> Incorrect. The technology getting more efficient does not make Bitcoin less efficient. You probably didn't actually think through this point, because it's nonsensical.

It very much does. The more efficient your miners the more you have a temporary advantage over your peers, so there’s incentive to replace your equipment. Then everyone upgrades theirs too. Once you do the difficulty adjusts to match the new hash power. Thus bitcoin becomes less efficient. There’s a straight line up and to the right over time in terms of hash rate, and power consumption but the max tx rate remains a pitiable 7tx/sec. Therefore by definition it’s become less efficient.

I mean 10 years ago it took a couple of Wh to run a tx and now it takes 607kWh! That’s the nonsensical part. You can’t tell me that efficiency hasn’t gone down haha.

> 95% of volume on exchanges that nobody pays any attention to anyway. Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Bittrex, etc all have completely legitimate volume numbers.

People very much pay attention to bitfinex, since they own the funbux people use to avoid AML/KYC. Even if we take the crazy claim that somehow people only pay attention to the “good 5%” of tx the fake volume sets the exchange rate dude. I can’t believe you’d sit there and say it’s okay if 95% of volume is fake and manipulative because you’ve found the good 5%. If only 5% of all USD transactions were fake, or all stock transactions were fake we’d burn the system to the ground.

> Thus is only true as long as new bitcoins are still being minted. And it's also only true if the rate of increase in the price outstrips the decrease in the minting rate.

So until 2050. And then you think miners will continue to secure the system for their health? Of course not. Transaction fees will skyrocket and if anyone is left using the system the process will repeat itself.

> Ok. Don't buy any then. Meanwhile, people living under repressive and fiscally irresponsible governments will continue to use it to protect their wealth, as they have been doing.

“Protecting their wealth” haha, good one. They lost 33% last week. 70% since all time high. 99.8% if they invested in alt coins. That’s not protection, that’s insanity. There’s so many better ways to protect wealth. It protects wealth like warm milk on a windowsill.

Trust me I’m not buying haha, I made a bunch of money in the initial bubble run, sold at 17K and got out. Today, there’s plenty of better investments in the stock market. I mean outperforming an asset class down 70% in 2 years is pretty pretty easy. Even SoftBank has a better track record. Actually it may be outperformed by the Turkish Lira at this point. (Edit) since 2017 the Turkish lira has done much better than bitcoin.

[darawk]

> It very much does. The more efficient your miners the more you have a temporary advantage over your peers, so there’s incentive to replace your equipment. Then everyone upgrades theirs too. Once you do the difficulty adjusts to match the new hash power. Thus bitcoin becomes less efficient. There’s a straight line up and to the right over time in terms of hash rate, and power consumption but the max tx rate remains a pitiable 7tx/sec. Therefore by definition it’s become less efficient.

So, yes, it becomes less efficient in terms of hash rate, that's true. But we don't really care about hash rate efficiency. What we do care about is power efficiency, but that scales with price not mining technology. And yes, the price has gone up, but power consumption will only continue to rise if the price does. This is basically an economic fact - miners are compensated in Bitcoin, so they should only be willing to consume as much dollar-weighted power as they receive in dollar-weighted bitcoin.

> People very much pay attention to bitfinex, since they own the funbux people use to avoid AML/KYC.

Bitfinex's volume is legitimate, though. Tether is an open question, but tether is also tradable at a market rate. The market believes tether is worth $1. If you disagree, you can short it, and if you actually believed tether was illegitimate, you'd do that. The fact that you haven't indicates to me that you don't really believe it.

> I can’t believe you’d sit there and say it’s okay if 95% of volume is fake and manipulative because you’ve found the good 5%. If only 5% of all USD transactions were fake, or all stock transactions were fake we’d burn the system to the ground.

I think the crux of the issue is that nobody cares about these exchanges. Their volume isn't real and everyone knows it, so they don't matter. If I claim to own a stock exchange that trades 100 trillion usd of volume every day, does that mean that now 95% of traded stocks are "fake"? No. It just means some random guy on the internet claimed something silly. That's what these fake exchanges more or less are.

> So until 2050. And then you think miners will continue to secure the system for their health? Of course not. Transaction fees will skyrocket and if anyone is left using the system the process will repeat itself.

> “Protecting their wealth” haha, good one. They lost 33% last week. 70% since all time high. 99.8% if they invested in alt coins. That’s not protection, that’s insanity. There’s so many better ways to protect wealth. It protects wealth like warm milk on a windowsill.

Better than Venezuelan Bolivars by a long shot.

> Trust me I’m not buying haha, I made a bunch of money in the initial bubble run, sold at 17K and got out. Today, there’s plenty of better investments in the stock market. I mean outperforming an asset class down 70% in 2 years is pretty pretty easy. Even SoftBank has a better track record. Actually it may be outperformed by the Turkish Lira at this point. (Edit) since 2017 the Turkish lira has done much better than bitcoin.

Measuring something's performance from it's all time high is a strange way to consider things. Nobody does that in any other market. There are plenty of assets down that much from their ATH. You're cherrypicking a particularly bad time period for Bitcoin. If you started in 2016, the returns outstrip any national currency on earth - which for the record, is also not a meaningful way to look at things.

[arcticbull]

> Bitfinex's volume is legitimate, though.

Citation needed. Bitfinex is one of the shadiest entities anywhere on earth. Why would you believe them?

> Tether is an open question, but tether is also tradable at a market rate. The market believes tether is worth $1. If you disagree, you can short it, and if you actually believed tether was illegitimate, you'd do that.

I would do that if the market wasn’t manipulated. It’s a suckers game to take any position in a manipulated market. Exchanges actively move the price up to liquidate shorts then spike it down to liquidate long. To play a rigged game at all is a suckers bet; it’s like trying to play a shell game because you’re confident you can see where they put the ball. That’s not why you’ll lose.

> Better than Venezuelan Bolivars by a long shot.

A single transaction fee for BTC is a weeks wages in Venezuela. It does not solve that problem or any other problem. Trust me if a Venezuelan were given the choice between moving a sliver of currency for a weeks wages or 600kWh of productive energy they’d very much pick the latter like any sane human.

[easymovet]

You are right that we will pay miners more in the future, that sounds like an opportunity not a problem.

[arcticbull]

You’re not understanding. The miners have to take that much money out of circulation (exchange BTC block rewards to dollars) to pay for their electric bills, which means that much new money has to come in to make up for it for the price to remain stable. It’s negative sum. And as the price rises so does the negative coefficient.