[georgia_peach]

I don't find the energy/environmental arguments compelling. US military accounts for almost half of US fuel consumption, 10-20% of the federal budget, and hundreds of toxic waste sites throughout the world. Propping-up the petrodollar has been their primary occupation for at least the last decade, if not longer.

[alxjrvs]

You find find an argument from me that the energy consumption of the US military is somehow acceptable.

However, all of that energy consumption being used by crypto is at the mercy of a desperately small number of speculators, hobbyists, and marks. For what it accomplishes - the actual utility it provides, which is to say, very little - it is an astonishingly energy-hungry system. Even compared to traditional banking systems like Visa - which process millions of transactions every second to bitcoin's, what, three? - it is shamefully wasteful.

I think I fall into the category of folks that "hate crypto", though to be honest, the environmental factors aren't what really gets my goat. Not only does the entire sphere speak like either well-fed con-men or desperate marks (Framing critique as "hate", for instance, is a common tactic), but the basis of their technology is focused on taking the single worst aspect of physical existence - that there is only so much stuff - and porting it to the digital world. At that point, the fact that it literally burns away resources wily-nily is just, what? Helpful metaphor?

[georgia_peach]

Even though many of these things are grifts wrapped in scams boxed in hustles, the idea of fiat currency upheld by energy and math seems like an improvement over a fiat currency upheld by energy and weapons, and a worthwhile endeavor.

BTC has beaten my money market account by a ridiculous amount. As a store of wealth, it has done its job well so far. People keep saying that it's a bubble, and perhaps it is. My gut tells me that the Weimerica scenario is just as likely as a BTC bubble-burst. I like having a variety of baskets to put my eggs in.

[alxjrvs]

The claim that Bitcoin (or ETH, or lite, or tether, or Doge) will function in any way like a currency in the near or middle future is a meaningless pipe dream with no technical roadmap to meaningful adoption. You can talk about the hypothetical benefits of the chain and the ideological failing of a fiat currency, but none of that maps to the reality of the crypto space right now. You're either a willing con-man or an unwilling mark.

Some people will get fat from crypto. That doesn't change the fact that it is a cesspool.

[alxjrvs]

>As a store of wealth

My uncle picks pockets down by the pier and keeps all the wallets in a bag under his bed. This, too, has been a growing store of wealth, beating out my dinky little ETF accounts. Despite his claims, I do not want to "learn from the best". Despite my wishes, he encourages me to check out the pier anyway.

[georgia_peach]

Who is BTC stealing from?

[alxjrvs]

The Bigger Idiot.

[georgia_peach]

The same can be said for stocks, bonds, real estate, commodities, and paper currency (7%+ USD inflation as of Jan!), and does not distinguish cryptocurrency from any other traditional asset. Quite a stretch to call that theft--unless it boils down to the old "property is theft" argument--but I'll let other people tilt at that windmill.

[GPerson]

Your argument is, “This thing may be bad, but what about this other thing that I think is even worse?”

It doesn’t address why you don’t find the arguments compelling. Do you think energy impact is completely trivial?

[georgia_peach]

In a crypto vs. fiat world, the energy consumption argument doesn't hold water when fiat probably uses just as much (or even more) energy.

[salamandersauce]

On a per transaction basis? It's important to remember that crypto is a tiny fraction of transactions.

[georgia_peach]

ENIAC consumed 174,000W. Raspberry Pi: 0.1W. Practice makes perfect.

[gostsamo]

Remember, HN is not with 100% US members. I'm not an US citizen and the US government does not give a flying fuck about my opinion toward their military spending. On the other hand, not all of the US citizens are eco friendly and are much pro US military than me, so it makes sense for them to vote for it.

[georgia_peach]

Nationality is beside the point. A store of value has to be backed by something (know-how, labor, natural resources, etc.), and these somethings (and their markets) have to be defended (agreements, force, counterespionage...), and all of this consumes a great deal of energy, but good luck finding out what that number is in the media. That's much harder piece of homework than typing a number into a mining calculator, hitting enter, and posting another the-sky-is-falling opinion piece on Medium.