My view is definitely that Bitcoin solves a problem I don't have, in just about the worst way possible (proof of work).
I truly believe it’s simply that they want it to fail since they missed the boat, and their ego is on the line as a forward thinking, “ahead of the curve” technologist.
It can’t be the biggest development of the last decade, what would that say about them? Therefore, inefficient ponzi that’s only used for drugs!
I don't really have a lot of regrets about that though. I have more regrets about selling other things too early, like stock positions I once owned.
I'm also very excited about Moderna's mRNA pipeline for example, building new vaccine for cronic illnesses (vaccines are trivial important application at this point of course), and Tesla's mission of decarbonizing the world and getting rid of air pollution. It's just Bitcoin is what I believe will give me the highest ROI right now to invest later in other important technologies.
However, I think the speculative bubble valuation of 2010 is well justified now. The thing about speculation is that sometimes the speculators are right. Tesla is almost certainly in a speculative bubble, too, but every day they arguably justify a higher base value.
That said, you seem relatively balanced for a crypto critic, and didn’t miss the boat but rather jumped off, so I’m not sure you’re part of the cohort I’m describing.
I certainly don't think so.
Thus most of the analysis is in the framework of systems efficiency (obviously, we're tech nerds afterall).
Crypto is a breakthrough in distributed computing, but utterly under-performs in efficiency against typical computing solutions. This is because of the trade-offs made in order to create a decentralized, permissionless, censorship resistant network.
dollars-per-btc * btc-reward-per-block / kwh-per-dollar
The network is paying out $X every 10 minutes to miners. If miners, in aggregate, are spending more than $X some will stop because it's not profitable. If miners, in aggregate, are spending less than $X, more miners join in because there's still some easy profit to be had. Obviously, there is some friction preventing this from being a perfect match (entry cost of buying new mining hardware) but this is an approximate price target for how much money "makes sense" for the miners to spend in total.Here on HN people seem to mostly understand that this means:
1. Higher bitcoin valuation leads directly to more spending on mining
2. Cheaper energy just leads to more energy consumed by mining for the same amount of spending
3. The amount spent on mining has no market-driven correlation to the amount "needed" for security
That seems like a pretty bad system from a technology point of view.