771–780 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The hair dryer, unlike a blockchain, is not a technology for durable, immutable and highly available storage, so I wouldn't judge it based on energy per byte second.
That us not the purpose of bitcoin. (There is no “blockchain technology”) While bitcoin is a record of transactions, and as such a database, it was not created to be a database. Did you read the OP article?
how many people would buy it (or even care about it) if they were gauranteed 100% that it would never increase in price? None. this proves its purely a speculative asset with the hope to dump the bags on some other greater fool. if there was some legitimate use then the focus would all be on stablecoins or people would love bitcoin even if it went down in value.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are modern solutions to transportation that are superior to cars, like rail, frequent busses, and bike infrastructure, Bicycles are nice but have lower capacity for cargo and passengers; mass transit is less flexible. So they aren’t strictly superior. > Bitcoin does not solve any problem that any other transaction network technology can't solve, How else do you propose to have a distributed ledger that is res…
> Bicycles are nice but have lower capacity for cargo and passengers; mass transit is less flexible. So they aren’t strictly superior. Mass transit in much of the world is perfectly acceptable. You build cities around transit, walking and biking instead of giant chasms between buildings. This is not a problem that exists in Europe. You don't have to get rid of all cars, just most of them. And the best way to start is…
Thats a good demonstration of ignoring the interests of everyone who doesn’t share your opinion, but it’s not how representative government is supposed to work.
> That's not a real problem. You solve it by ignoring it and getting back to things that actually matter.
Then you can go back to ignoring bitcoin.
> Again inflation is easy: once you obtain money, purchase assets.
Again, this is not an answer for the problem, and pretending it is just ignores the reality that billions of people live with every day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you think the US military or any military will go away because Bitcoin you’re delusional. > Why is there not a daily hackernews thread complaining about the energy consumption of the US military? People are willing to pay a high energy cost for safety. Bitcoin doesn’t provide me any safety and it doesn’t have the strongest military in the world claiming it’s worth anything. If you think Bitcoin will topple governm…
Erm, there's a good portion of the world's population (I'd say over half) that doesn't think the US military's activities support it's safety.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are modern solutions to transportation that are superior to cars, like rail, frequent busses, and bike infrastructure, Bicycles are nice but have lower capacity for cargo and passengers; mass transit is less flexible. So they aren’t strictly superior. > Bitcoin does not solve any problem that any other transaction network technology can't solve, How else do you propose to have a distributed ledger that is res…
>Bicycles are nice but have lower capacity for cargo and passengers My e-cargo bike with a trailer can hold more stuff than my sedan ever could. Did an Ikea trip with it last year, carried home a filing cabinet, a desk frame, and a small table. > mass transit is less flexible frequent mass transit is plenty flexible. If a bus comes by your stop every 5 minutes, you never need to worry about planning. > distributed mu…
Thats uncharitable, and in my opinion ignorant. Inflation distorts the signals people use to make investments, leading to misallocation of assets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are modern solutions to transportation that are superior to cars, like rail, frequent busses, and bike infrastructure, Bicycles are nice but have lower capacity for cargo and passengers; mass transit is less flexible. So they aren’t strictly superior. > Bitcoin does not solve any problem that any other transaction network technology can't solve, How else do you propose to have a distributed ledger that is res…
| How else do you propose to have a distributed ledger that is resistant to inflation? A deflationary distributed ledger has yet to prove itself as having any kind of real utility in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is that it was not a premine. I don’t know how can you say it’s a small difference..
Nano was distributed via solving capchas(pow) no different than mining bitcoin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is accidentally a good analogy. Because yes, cars have made the world materially worse, not because horses are better, but because dense urban development, public transit, walking, and cycling is better. Cars are enormously wasteful, much like bitcoin is, not only because it uses way more energy than is necessary for the task it is performing (~90% of the energy used by cars is spent to move the car, not the car…
technically almost everything beyond food and medicine is wasteful. BUT cars improve the quality of my life (i like to drive). bitcoins floating through the cybersphere do not. end of story.
And if cars were primarily used as an enthusiast pursuit (like horses in the modern world, actually), this argument would make sense. But cars are not primarily an enthusiast pursuit, instead they are something that we've structured our entire way of life around, and made enormous sacrifices for. Many people need a car whether they want one or not, and we all pay the consequences for it.
I'm ready to be downvoted to oblivion, especially by all the Bitcoin purists, but I hope my message sparks at least some curiosity. Bitcoin is getting "weaker" every year for several reasons: - emerging centralization due to economies of scale. If this trend continues the mining power will be so consolidated that a 51% attack will be likely. The Nakamoto coefficient is already at 4, and tending towards 3. - energy us…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kant's second imperative is great! However, people wanting feedback beyond mere downvotes is legitimate and downvoting without comment is the actual wrong here IMO. IMO the best scheme here is that you _must_ provide a reason to downvote. People who vote for your reason [ie they agree with you about downvoting the parent] should be the actual downvotes. This way instead of apparently arbitrary downvotes one gets a li…
I agree that the downvote mechanism on HN could use some refinement! Funny thing, when I went to quote the specific HN guideline, I'm almost certain it used to say "Please don't comment about downvotes. It never helps" or something very much like that. But the current guideline says: > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. Which we're all in violation…