If you ask Bitcoiners, they will tell you that the energy in Bitcoin is stored as value and that Creditcard transactions require also huge amount of energy and therefore the energy consumption of Bitcoin will not be a problem. And it’s all green energy! Yeah, this is all utter bullshit, but as long as Bitcoin fans continue to believe in Bitcoin AND new money keeps coming in, it will unfortunately continue. Gosh, I can’t express how much I hate Bitcoin.
1 Like
I don’t hate bitcoin.
I usually would just lean back and smile, like I always do with bubbles.
I think everybody should be able to spend what he has in any way he likes. But the double moral of saving energy and throwing it out the window for absolutely nothing is just a sign of the world reaching at Idiocracy..
Every single bitcoin transaction costs the amount of water a swimming pool needs for a year. The footprint of bitcoin is just unreal, comparing this with the few computers banks use for their transactions is insane.
Mommy brings the youngsters in a SUV to the Fridays for Future demos, they fly to the jungle and invest in bitcoin…
1 Like
I suppose the whole thread will be deleted and that is OK. There is no such thing like bad advertising…
But the theory that banks would try to stop bitcoin is rare at least. Why should they, they make a lot of money with it. They don’t even need bitcoin transactions to trade in bitcoin, as there are official derivatives traded in Chicago and New York and probably more places. Banks make money of it and would never stop it.
A single bitcoin transaction has the same carbon footprint as 1,518,874 Visa transactions according to the bitcoin energy consumption index. That is the point, otherwise it would be just another bubble for the many dummies around…
4 Likes
The truth is: the bank pays me more. You are welcome to transfer me a few Bitcoins, then I can gladly support your cause. I will send you my Bitcoin address 
1 Like
I believe the whole discussion is driven by false fallacy.
A new digital solution has been launched to solve a problem. It never solved any problem and now is simply being propagated by the very institutions it was designed to bypass (namely Govt & banks). Who cares about the purpose when price goes up 
So now the discussion is always about everything else except the actual use. Because it’s easier to talk about other things like
- people love it , so…
- You ignore it at your own peril. So….
- There is limited supply, so…
- It is digital , so less expensive to maintain, so…
- It went up in value million times, so….
- It was used in El Salvador & it can solve issues of Burkina Faso… so…
But how many times in last 12 months, we heard about
- it is solving a real problem in a real developed country?
It’s fine. I personally don’t have any issues with the marketing narratives. Everyone has right to sell their product. But I find it a bit hypocritical when people tend to claim BTC is solving world hunger problem when it’s not even used to transact money in meaningful way (compared to traditional options)
I will say it again. India transacts world‘s highest number of digital money transactions every day. China transacts highest revenue every day. None of them is using Bitcoin or any crypto to achieve this.
3 Likes
Another angle from me. You might think it would support the price of Bitcoin if Central Banks started to treat it as a strategic reserve, right? Furthermore, Swiss citizens will soon be invited to support an initiative.
In the USA, Trump seems interested in the government holding more Bitcoin. Once it is declared a strategic reserve, the hegemon might treat it as such:
- Tax ownership of it (German VAT for precious metals purchases)
- Declare it illegal for individuals to hold BTC (Gold in 1933 in USA)
- Nationalize BTC mining (Venezuela nationalized gold mine in 2008)
- Bomb BTC mining operations of certain foreign nations (US war in Iraq 2003 partially because of oil)
- declare adjacent resources (chips, energy) as strategic and start war on it
So it might be a bad idea to tie DeFi to government institutions. Even if the price might benefit from it. Got some ideas from this podcast:
Back to the initial price to the moon question.
There are 2 streams of Bitcoiners on price:
- BTC goes to 1M$+ this year. When it starts rising it’ll go quick within days or weeks. (Samson Mow, Adam Beck, PlanB…)
- BTC power law crew… it’ll be far less, because Bitcoin is physics and it follows an adjustable log-log model. But peaks are possible. 300k are in reach. (Giovanni and co.)
My take: I care now much less about price as I did four years back. I just stack everything in it and take it/pay with it, when I need it, knowing that in 4 years the price will be higher (until proved wrong).
1 Like
I am only writing here to express an opinion, not to argue. I have no interest in participating in the debate ongoing in this thread (and the last) as I’ve made up my mind about it and have no goal of convincing anyone of anything.
I’ve come 'round to understanding your point over time, and respect it as it’s free from cryptobro toxicity, but in my opinion it’d be good to separate these two points:
May be, but isn’t the flipside that “the price going up” also confirmation bias considering the other points made for BTC haven’t materialized?
What is the “so what” here? Opportunity cost? If that’s the case then doesn’t this lead to all of it being a vehicle of making money rather than anything else? I have ZERO problem with this proposition, I even hold a few shitcoins myself because why not.
A genuine question I had is don’t you guys (BTC believers) fear that the shilling and pumping (and dumping) of shitcoins by the Trumpster will really tarnish BTC for the masses? Even I draw a line between “crypto” and BTC, but if I were you I would be afraid as the masses don’t.
2 Likes
For me everything is a shitcoin beside Bitcoin. Apparently, yesterday Trump bought 47 WBTC (wrapped). It’s the same sh… as $TRUMP or $ETH or a lttle less sh… IBIT and other MSTR like vehicles. El Salvador has a public address to watch their stack grow. Up until now, Trump has proved nothing for Bitcoin. (but there are quite true Bitcoiners in his admin, we’ll see what happens).
Regarding the discussions and arguments, I thought we handled all of them in the Future of Bitcoin thread. Why repeating it?
I understand the arguments, but some were wrong 12 years ago and are wrong today. For me those popping up everytime again as Bitcoin price pops. It seems as people react to confirm that they did nothing wrong in not buying Bitcoin. A confirmation seeking. I’m sorry, but in a Austrian economist manner: the utility is shown in the price which is almost 100k in CHF.
If the bitcoiners are right everybody will have Bitcoin, but bought/earned to the price they deserve.
4 Likes
Yes, for you, and maybe even me, but what about my mother and anyone like her who barely understands anything more complex than savings accounts, and asked me “If I have a few crypto” because she heard (BTC) in the news a few months back? The masses arguably understand even less about crypto than they do about stocks and bonds, for them every crypto is “crypto”.
agree… but maybe this changes and maybe much more through Trump, even when getting scammed by shitcoins. It’s actually bullish dor BItcoin.
As you said, even stocks and bonds are not understood. A friend of mine bought a fund 20 years ago and lost 90%. He has now only a saving account and don’t want to hear anything about investing and about crypto much less.
(My mother is happy about her stack bought 2 years ago… but she doesn’t understands it fully and dooes’t want to understand. It’s ok)
1 Like
I think the AI server parks are consuming more, and I’m not sure they are all used for the benefits of the human kind. If we want to be dramatic
Let’s not start the heated arguments already… (next few years will be fun for the mods)
Maybe if you want a more balanced take: Crypto executives fear investor backlash over Trump memecoins but there is genuine fear from crypto folks about the trump memecoins.
1 Like
I don’t think my take was unbalanced, just not eloquent and structured like the (great) article you posted. The essence of it is 100% the same, key points:
- It drives liquidity away from legitimate use case projects
- It can slow down the regulatory process
- Memecoins always hurt retail buyers (who don’t know the difference) in the end
And last but not least:
- It’s a means to essentially bribe the POTUS, and anyone else taking notes and thinking “hey, that’s a good idea”
Any one of the above will, in my opinion, be detrimental to BTC (which is the topic of this thread).
1 Like
Closed. I suspect that soon I will have to preventively close any thread mentioning Trump…
3 Likes