However, that wasn't really the question at issue.
Weren't you the one who brought up the question in the first place?
> wasting it isn't green
The point is that renewable energy sources tend to produce maximum power at off-peak times. So to serve peak times, we need more wind and solar generation than is required for off-peak times.
Since we don't have good ways to store and time-shift electricity, intermittent Bitcoin mining is one way to soak up the excess capacity off-peak to make the generation capacity economical.
Should we just turn the windmills and solar panels off during off-peak times?
Or should we leave them on and get clean energy at a price that's cheaper than coal?
Apologies if I was unclear. I was referring to the parent's statement that "fortunately, in Bitcoin whale ownership does not imply control over the network. Fortunately, Bitcoin is PoW and not PoS."
My retort was that whales in Bitcoin control such a disproportionate share of the currency that if they wanted to control the network itself too, they could simply buy the miners which isn't really too dissimilar from staking in a proof of stake coin. My understanding is that each mining pool provides roughly the same security as a PoS validator.
When I replied "however, that wasn't really the question at issue," what I meant that the "greenness" wasn't really the crux of my reply, rather I was suggesting that network control falls to those with the most coins regardless of whether you're operating PoS or PoW, the only difference is whether resources are consumed or not along the way.
[edit] Given a choice between reliable power coming out the back of a coal furnace in town and unreliable power in the middle of nowhere coming out the back of a waste plant and a solar farm, for probably 50% more, I know which I'd pick if I were running a business.
This is again greenwashing.
Not even 0.5% of global energy usage.
The problem is bitcoin has failed to deliver on these promises. It truly is a tragedy that so much energy is being wasted on BTC specifically. It should be redirected towards Monero.
That energy usage is supposed to buy us a monetary system that's completely independent of government. Uncensorable, untraceable, unsanctionable, anonymous, the works. It literally doesn't matter how much energy it uses, as long as those properties are achieved. The problem is BTC failed at all of them. It really is a waste to spend all this energy mining BTC when better projects like Monero exist.
> It literally doesn't matter how much energy it uses, as long as those properties are achieved.
This is like saying it doesn't matter how slow it is as long as your computing machine is Turing complete. It doesn't matter if you achieve those properties on an unworkable system and it especially isn't true that more than a tiny fraction of people value them above cost or utility — a drug deal might care a lot about untraceable but the average person doesn't care enough to pay more or use something inconvenient.
Because banks were never supposed to provide untraceable, uncensorable, unsanctionable, anonymous transactions. They do the opposite.
Cryptocurrencies are not banks. They're coins. Analogous to cash which also allows for private transactions. Cryptocurrency is an attempt to create a digital cash system. It has nothing to do with banks.
> the average person doesn't care enough to pay more or use something inconvenient
Yes, this is why bitcoin failed. Normal people can't transact with it. The world will not change until everyone is transacting in cryptocurrency, leaving USD and all other currencies behind.
Countries that use other countries currencies (in the way El Salvador uses the US Dollar) still have armies and some countries that use their own fiat dollars (Japan, Iceland) have no armies.
These two are uncorrelated.
Unless there's some straight line between, say, switching to Bitcoin and Xi Jinping realizing Taiwan was always its own country and grabbing some Baijiu with Tsai Ing-wen. I'm very excited to find out how Bitcoin solves the Hong Kong situation too! And I suppose it'll take care of business in the Sudan? Finally that trip to Yemen is back on the table. C'mon now...