Hacker News Reader

Comment by PragmaticPulp | Hacker News Reader

> On an actually uncapped Bitcoin instance, Blocks (Block size) and transaction fees will grow exponentially, rendering all such “Bitcoin is environmentally terrible” and “Miners aren’t profitable” calculations absurdly wrong.

This doesn't make any sense.

If anything were to make mining more profitable, we would see even more miners come online.

There is no scenario in which Bitcoin mining becomes less environmentally terrible by paying more money to miners. Those payments incentivize more miners to come online and, if significant enough, would encourage miners to bring older, less efficient equipment online relative to today's rates.

View on HN

If transactions scale enough for you to be able to shut down most bank branches, end commutes for all banking and central banking employees, shut down all credit card companies and their offices and terminals, turn off ATMs, end printing physical paper money and minting money, just to mention a few, I think the environment will be way, way better off.

That’s the argument behind unlimited on-chain transactions.

> end commutes for all banking and central banking employees

Because central banks and banks didn’t exist when we were on metal standards…

There's no evidence that any of that would be technically feasible. And hypothetically even if it was technically feasible, the nation states which have taxing authority and hold an effective monopoly on violence would never permit it.

Most world governments and taxing authorities work for their populace, they could be easily voted out if people saw what other nations are benefiting from such innovation.

As for what’s feasible and evidence on it, I assure you, Edison had no clue that the internet will one day be born out of his electricity inventions and that it will be mostly used for porn, so sit back, relax and enjoy the next 100 years of untold human history.

    As for what’s feasible and evidence on it, I assure you, Edison had no clue 
    that the internet will one day be born out of his electricity inventions and 
    that it will be mostly used for porn, so sit back, relax and enjoy the next 
    100 years of untold human history.

This is a statement of faith. As such expecting it to win an argument involving logic is doomed to fail. You may be believe it but I and many others have no reason to.

> Most world governments and taxing authorities work for their populace, they could be easily voted out if people saw what other nations are benefiting from such innovation.

you've got a lot of faith in "most world governments and taxing authorities". here in the US, i look at other countries who include in their tax statements a breakdown of where all your tax bill is going. that looks like a thing those other citizens benefit from, so please tell me: how can i vote this into effect here?

As a voter, why would I do something so stupid as to put my country's economy under the control of a Ponzi scheme invented by incompetent programmers? That's just delusional, makes no sense at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com