awt

Btc value increased not due to scams - neither the scammers nor the scammed ever hold the stuff (that is, off an exchange in a secure wallet), but due to long term holders, to whom it will continue to be attractive until some state goes back on the gold standard, which is not happening.

EDIT:

Also, the number of people to whom btc is attractive is less important than the type of people. It may be that there is never mass adoption of Bitcoin - it is also the case that throughout history most people never had any money at all. And even though most people never had any money, sound money has been extremely valuable nonetheless because most people don't know what to do with money anyway.

What is the standard for virtuous use of energy?

Ok then how can you say that Bitcoin mining is wasteful? How can you be certain that it will not lead to massive productivity gains? What is the standard you are comparing Bitcoin to for resources required to enable censorship free payments? And how do you know precisely how much censorship free payments is worth now or at any time in the future?

Funny. HN users have about 922 downvotes on my comments left before they lose the chance to get an occasional clue.

You might want to re-consider your claim of my ignorance of history and maybe think if I might have a point, even though it opposes your opinion. Nevertheless, certainly you're not claiming the USG knew that expending X resources on the early internet would result in Google?

[edit]

For those reading this who are perhaps a bit more open minded, it is not clear what the future productivity gains will be from moving capital allocation out of the hands of central banks into the hands of Bitcoin hodlers. To beat a dead horse, If 51% of energy is devoted to securing btc, but capital is allocated in a way such that productivity increases x%, where x offsets mining/transaction costs, what's the problem?

As were computers. And the internet. It is not a given in any way that x amount of energy maps to productivity level y.

If it isn't too obvious to bring up, is it possible that we don't necessarily know for certain that using energy to mine Bitcoin is a waste? For example some may have considered manufacturing computers a waste of energy, but the productivity gains of that use of energy has far surpassed the cost of manufacturing computers.

Also hacker news.

We are surely fortunate that the U.S. and Canadian settlers decimated the estimated 60 million head of buffalo ranging North America until the late 1800s. Global warming could have been exacerbated greatly by their continued existence.

> Your argument tries to set a trap for anyone responding, by forcing a debate on moral relativism.

True.

> If you think murder cannot be defined as "bad", then why have we outlawed it?

The original comment has already been downvoted and is on its way to becoming invisible, so I see no point in having the debate.

[EDIT]

Or for that matter, I don't see the point of taking any unpopular position on HN.

If Bitcoin succeeds, it will consume 51% of the earth's energy supply. If you want to claim this is bad, you will need the support of some sort system of universal ethics.

Eth used an ICO.

It isn't up to just the above parties, but also to the people who actually hold bitcoin. Those holders who prefer sound money will sell on the chain that isn't.

I wonder if this is true in China and Japan as well.

I was just trying to encourage you to stick with western women in western countries in spite of and in opposition to the state.

I might point out that men are not totally fine. Men are imprisoned at a much higher rate than women, enter and complete college at a lower rate than women, and have a higher rate of successful suicide. Men also bear the vast majority of the tax burden and have few rights in family court. Men also live shorter lives than women.

"Schopenhauer settled permanently in Frankfurt in 1833, where he remained for the next twenty-seven years, living alone except for a succession of pet poodles named Atman and Butz."

If you want to end up like Schopenhauer, by all means be an anti-natalist. Also ask yourself if you would prefer never to have been born, even given whatever hardships you may have had to have endured. Not everyone was or is as miserable as Schopenhauer seems to have been.

I'm currently re-individualizing my personal IT. It is work, but I own the results and they won't be erased by the next minor os "upgrade."

Web development is not serious work (I say this as a web developer). Naggum wrote software for oil rigs. That is a serious business where lives are on the line, not to mention real and not nominal wealth.

Interesting. I found him through a different obit. Worst way to find out about someone like that.

Did you read the Naggum link? He is not easily dismissed.

Out of curiosity where did you first hear of Naggum? My route to his threads was a bit circuitous. His work as extended my career, to say the least.

Bitcoin and its flaws are rather well understood at this point but perhaps only by a few. Indeed if you do not understand it, stay out.

Can anyone point me to the best argument for hiding complexity instead of eliminating it?

Is it possible that some not so wise folks left large amounts of btc on excahanges that had risen in value 100x from when they'ed been transferred to the silk road wallet?

Also, what do you know of the offline blackmarket volume of cocaine, heroine, meth? How does it compare to the (self reported) volume on darknet markets? Is it even notable in comparison? Why do you think cartels don't run their own dark markets? Because they're idiots?

my claim that not much was happening? No. I also don't have proof there's no god, or that unicorns don't exist, and so on.

Do you think it's possible anonymous markets themselves may not be the best sources of information about actual volume of transactions occurring on them? Certainly they have some incentive to fake volume, and no real accountability since .. they're anonymous.

Not by any means. Still is cash afaik.

The illegal drug market in BTC wasn't actually a thing. It never mattered to anyone but journos.

I'm asking about you though, not the founders.