[maxbond]

> Keeping the network secure isn’t valuable?

Keeping the network secure has the same value as you apply to the network. If you're a Bitcoin maximalist this is infinite. If you're absolutely opposed to it it's zero. For most people it's somewhere in between. We can't pressupose that the energy expenditure is valuable because it is functionally necessary to the network.

> So whose paying for all the energy exactly? How long until they’re bled dry?

This is sort of like saying, "if gambling isn't valuable, where is the money coming from?" It's an activity some people want to engage in, and in the interests of liberty and self determination they should be able to do so. But when it has negative externalities of a severity that can't be ignored, something has to give and it had to be curbed to the point we reach a tolerable balance.

To be frank, Bitcoin hasn't demonstrated that it has deeper value than being a speculative financial asset. We've got a lot of speculative financial assets, most of them don't cost 2% of our energy expenditure in environmental externality.