| > I might as well flip your argument on its head: if it was as easy to store energy as you propose, then electricity prices would never become negative. Then you're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that cost/complexity for dealing with energy overproduction goes: Ignore it -> Adjust existing systems -> Store it -> Use it for mining. The fact that storage is still a small niche shows that there's not enough waste to make even simple storage clearly profitable, so we're still mostly on the "adjust" step. If it was a big untapped market, we'd never get to the mining part, because pumping water uphill is far technologically simpler than setting up a data center full of video cards. > Think e.g. Crypto Valley in Switzerland, or Bitcoin enthusiasts visiting (or moving to?) El Salvador. And we all know how the Prisoner's Dilemma plays out in the long run: to the detriment of its actors. El Salvador is an absolutely nonsensical usage of BTC. Bitcoin has long dropped any pretenses of being a currency, and is a horrible fit for normal people. BTW, the experiment in El Salvador is not going well. > And to you last points: ask modern day Venezuelans or North Koreans whether it's a waste to have sound money that can't be inflated by the whim of self-serving autocrats. As far as I can gather, the experiment in Venezuela is failure thus far, and North Korea is completely a no-go, since the general population has no internet access and NK barely has electricity. |
That's just, like, your opinion, man.