[jcranmer]

The world hasn't used the gold standard for 50 years, and arguably even the Bretton Woods arrangement itself is a pretty significant departure from the gold standard. It's not like the gold standard proved to be historically a very effective basis for economic activity, so trying to say that Bitcoin is exactly like the gold standard isn't a strong argument.

Historically, the main advantage of the gold standard is that it doesn't require a high degree of state capacity to function, and of course throughout most of human history, state capacity was pretty damn low. But we live in an era where states largely have high state capacity, which allows us to move to economic standards that require that capacity to function effectively. Trying to argue for a system that increases inefficiency so that it can eliminate the need for a high state capacity government feels like a step backwards to me.

[kraftman]

I don't think I'm arguing for inefficiency, but I'm saying why is bitcoin called out for it specifically?

[jcranmer]

Apropos of anything else, no one is arguing for a return to the gold standard, yet Bitcoin enthusiasts love to talk about its role as an alternative to fiat money. Sure, you can make the argument that gold mining is as inefficient as Bitcoin [1], but it's a strawman argument at best because there's no advocacy for the gold standard.

[1] I don't think this is a good argument, tbh.