@jalcine #TheGuardian totally misses the point. Bitcoin "mining" is not about harvesting coins; that's just a side-effect. #Bitcoin mining is what makes it have its unique status of sound money and immutability of its ledger.
Whether you generate 12.5 BTC per block now or just get mining fees in about 100 years, the mining cost will stay and it is needed for the money not to lose this unique status.
It makes no sense to see the cost of Bitcoin mining as a per coin bases and compare it with gold

@stevenroose "just a side effect" 😂😂😂

Serious question: what is your purpose in making this comment?

@stevenroose why do you think the OP or anyone else here needs help understanding Bitcoin?

@SallyStrange Because OP shared an article that makes a totally senseless point.

@stevenroose yeah, you said it doesn't make sense, but you didn't really explain why it doesn't make sense.

@stevenroose
>>"Bitcoin "mining" is not about harvesting coins; that's just a side-effect." Arguing that which was not contested (that energy consumption is a side effect)

>>" mining is what makes it have its unique status of sound money and immutability of its ledger."

Nobody claims otherwise

1/2

Follow

@stevenroose >>"Whether you generate 12.5 BTC per block now or just get mining fees in about 100 years, the mining cost will stay and it is needed for the money not to lose this unique status."

Kinda supports the OP's point, that the currency's existence is not worth the costs it imposes on society

>>"It makes no sense to see the cost of Bitcoin mining as a per coin bases and compare it with gold"

Why does it make no sense?

@SallyStrange Because Bitcoin mining sustains the safety status of the currency, while gold mining *only* serves increasing the supply.
Count all the costs related to gold storage, gold transportation, gold safekeeping etc. in the same equation, especially 100 years ago when most countries were still on the gold standard.

@stevenroose you just said that it makes "no sense" to compare the energy costs if gold mining vs Bitcoin "mining". Now you appear to suggest it could make sense, if one accounts for the costs of gold storage and safekeeping. (What about the storage & upkeep cost of Bitcoin?) The relevance of monetary policy from 100 years ago to your objection to the comparison isn't clear. The time frame of the cost comparison in the paper, on the other hand, is very clear. Your explanation doesn't satisfy.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Eldritch Café

Une instance se voulant accueillante pour les personnes queers, féministes et anarchistes ainsi que pour leurs sympathisant·e·s. Nous sommes principalement francophones, mais vous êtes les bienvenu·e·s quelle que soit votre langue.

A welcoming instance for queer, feminist and anarchist people as well as their sympathizers. We are mainly French-speaking people, but you are welcome whatever your language might be.