[shawnz]

I'm not saying we can never call anything an irresponsible use of energy.

What I am saying is that we can't by default call all new technologies an irresponsible use of energy either.

The fact that it uses energy is not justification alone that it is bad. We use energy to achieve utility for our species. The only way we could stop all our energy consumption would be to cease to exist.

So, why is Bitcoin an irresponsible use and other technologies are a responsible use? THAT is the interesting question. Volume alone can't be enough to justify it because many important technologies use way more energy than Bitcoin at only 0.6% of global use.

So it must come down to an opinion that cryptocurrencies aren't useful: that is the real disagreement here. It isn't about energy usage, but usefulness (per unit of energy usage), which is a highly subjective judgement. That is what I am trying to point out.

[Nursie]

> The only way we could stop all our energy consumption would be to cease to exist.

Who's talking about stopping all energy consumption?

> So, why is Bitcoin an irresponsible use and other technologies are a responsible use?

New financial instrument brought online during a climate crisis uses more power than most countries == irresponsible/malicious.

There, made that simple for you.

If you want to argue your opinion that such a thing is worthwhile given the background, that's a pretty steep hill to climb.

[shawnz]

That doesn't explain the rationale why such a thing in particular would be irresponsible and not other technologies.

[Nursie]

Who says other things are all perfectly responsible?

I didn't.

[shawnz]

I never claimed you did. I am just saying that you haven't justified why Bitcoin is actually an irresponsible use of energy. What makes its usage level irresponsible? Why is it more irresponsible than other technologies which use more energy than it?

[Nursie]

> What makes its usage level irresponsible?

New financial instrument using more power than most countries. Thought you might have got that by now.

> Why is it more irresponsible than other technologies which use more energy than it?

Nobody is making that argument. This is just whataboutery. But in general, the fact that it's a new financial instrument using more power than most countries, at a time when we have a global climate crisis brought on largely by our energy usage.

[shawnz]

> New financial instrument using more power than most countries. Thought you might have got that by now.

But you haven't justified why that is an irresponsible use.

> Nobody is making that argument. This is just whataboutery.

Yes, true, I guess you never claimed that the other ~99.4% of energy usage isn't actually less justified than Bitcoin. Sorry to imply otherwise.