[xxxxxyy1]

> There's no value created by crunching random SHA-256.

So I shouldn't have to pay high wages if my employees aren't creating anything of value?

People seem to pick and choose when they believe the labor theory of value.

The point of the matter is that value *is* what people are willing to pay for something.

You could argue that a Van Gogh is just arbitrary colors applied to a canvas, it's not worth anything inherently other than through the subjective valuations of other people.

[prox]

I think the big problem is the amount of energy this thing is costing, and the huge load it puts on the GPU market, which could very much be a speculative bubble. There is a lot of difference between your examples and Bitcoin :

The labour of your employees hopefully adds something you can show to your clients : it’s a lot less speculation on your part.

Van Gogh is a name in the art world, and has a well documented place in art theory. Van Gogh is hardly speculative.

[yaa_minu]

>... and the huge load it puts on the GPU market

Point of correction: Bitcoin is mined with ASICS not GPUs

[Closi]

The labour theory of value? You seem just to be bringing out 1800's economic theory and trying to apply it directly to 2021 bitcoin.

Theory that has been replaced, I should note, by neoclassical and Keynesian economics.

[mempko]

Van Gogh has a value to rich people who have most of the money. Ask yourself this, is it ok to have a world that caters to what a few people care about?

[xxxxxyy1]

> has a value to rich people who have most of the money

so you're agreeing that value is entirely dependent on subjectivity and circumstance?

[mempko]

Only if you consider money as the only measure of value, which I disagree. Just because someone has all the magic government credits (money) doesn't mean they are the end all of measuring value no? There are plenty of things people value but would never pay money for it, or in most cases just don't have the money.