Hacker News Reader

Your straw-man argument hardly settles our debate.

If I decided that I could profitably use toxic-waste laden land, then yes of course I would still buy it and, yes of course, still not care because that's what due diligence is about.

Your liquor store sells alcohol that kills more people under the age of 30 than any other way...why aren't you standing in front of it demanding it shut down?

View on HN

It's not about who created the coins, obviously. It's about the fact that more than 65% of the hashpower securing the network is in the hands of a small group of mining pools in the PRC. Adopting BTC is de facto handing over sovereignty of your currency to the PRC [1].

They get to censor transactions, they get to decide what makes it and what doesn't, they get to double-spend if they want to. That's how authoritarian government works.

This is a natural consequence of the proof-of-waste system employed. The hashpower goes to the place where waste would be the cheapest, and that's China.

[1] https://news.bitcoin.com/65-of-global-bitcoin-hashrate-conce...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com