51–60 of 198 posts
We keep talking about how tech should be used to make a net positive change yet we allow this glorified linked list that has 0 real world benefits after a decade to get a pass because some man children run around promising it's the future.
We keep talking about how tech should be used to make a net positive change yet we allow this glorified linked list that has 0 real world benefits after a decade to get a pass because some man children run around promising it's the future.
Other random bitcoin concerns (apart from the environmental ones): - How about people stop accepting laundered bitcoins first and foremost? - Any bitcoins that have provably been involved in illegal stuff - Any monero/whathaveyou that come from exchanges that accept bitcoin that have received Bitcoins that were involved in illegal stuff - Will bitcoin still have value when quantum computers are around?
I'm pretty much the opposite of a bitcoin fan, but I think if you replaced "bitcoin" with "dollars" in your comment you would see that it sounds a bit weird. I bet most dollars have been involved in shady business at some point during their life. With bitcoin you have a better chance at figuring this fact out I guess. Regarding quantum computers: Quantum computers are not known to be exponentially faster at hashing t…
>"While the government did approach us for assistance on Bitcoin, this is not something the World Bank can support given the environmental and transparency shortcomings," they added. Environmental as the #1 concern? Bitcoin's enegery:market-cap ratio - a proxy for energy vs. value to humans - is >300x better than an airline & 60x better than JP Morgan & 20x better than google's. https://twitter.com/Okcoin/status/1403…
The absolute figures are bitcoin uses about the equivalent of Sweden’s energy consumption every year. Renewable energy isn’t free and should be replacing legacy sources, not being used to do pretend work. Environmental is a huge factor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The World Bank would respond to such a request from a Government, it doesn't mean it's a 'big deal'. Their statement is clear. They very politely and in so many words saying: 1) To start you are corrupt and none of this will work without solving that 2) it makes no financial sense and 3) there are real environmental concerns. When they sat 'transparency' what they mean is 'you are corrupt'. When they cite 'regulatory…
What are the regulatory, financial and legal concerns? Why are they a deal-breaker? If there were no concerns El Salvador wouldn’t need to ask any help, would it?
They cite environmental and transparency concerns, but somehow I believe it's more about control and ensuring the continuation of the debt based fiat systems. I have a litmus test I use when discussing global financial politics with friends - "What were the main factors you think lead to Ghaddafi's killing?"
It may be but what is your litmus test about? Can you elaborate on it?
They cite environmental and transparency concerns, but somehow I believe it's more about control and ensuring the continuation of the debt based fiat systems. I have a litmus test I use when discussing global financial politics with friends - "What were the main factors you think lead to Ghaddafi's killing?"
The debt based system will not go away if we ever move the entire economy to bitcoin (laughable as that idea is). You'll have fractional bitcoin reserve banking with absolutely no difference compared to today. In fact, the fact that bitcoin has no on-chain notion of credit is a major limitation that relegates it to being digital gold, not a digital dollar.
Precisely that was the OPs point why it is a good alternative to the debt-based financial system we have.
I'm very ignorant about Bitcoin, but given El Salvador's big problem with crime, doesn't adopting Bitcoin give the cartels an extremely easy way to launder their money?
Bitcoin started with no connection to real money. Still the connection is quite flaky. Essentially people are buying pieces of the output of a program without any government/majority backing that has any worth. Then, they try to justify it, because for the time being, the main/practically only way to make money out of it, is to find someone else to sell party of this output.
I guess I am getting old and I can't understand how something with so high transaction fees, latency, environment impact, computationally inefficient (as a feature!) is something sought after by some people.
Here's something I want answered (all three parties are invited to respond): Is there a dependency on mature internet infrastructure that exists for a country to adopt BTC as its currency? Seems like there is to me, but maybe I'm not fully appreciating how this works or am overestimating the connectivity requirements for running BTC at scale in a modern economy.