adh636

Hopefully there will be consequences for him abusing the legal system in the way he has.

I hadn't heard that one before. I like it! Nice article.

> Should all our financial systems be open source too?

Yes.

Trying to better under the origins of a global pandemic is not an inconsequential endeavor.

Not so sure your analogy works here. Aren't containment buildings meant to protect the area where the reactors are? I think the closer analogy would be saying the US needed to tap the breaks on the Manhattan Project because nuclear weapons are dangerous even though Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia are going full steam ahead during WW2 or the cold war with their nuclear weapons programs. The world would probably be very different it we had chosen the 'safer' path.

> I did not say that he broke any laws, nor do I believe that what he did was illegal in the slightest?

>> Where they literally tried to create slave farms to obtain these in game currencies?

'literally tried to create slave farms' makes me believe you did think he was doing something 'illegal in the slightest'.

> For a slightly higher cost...

> I don't understand this factory farm model

Seems to me like you understand it just fine. Or maybe you are underestimating the cost difference or people's ability/willingness to spend more on these items.

Your argument seems to be that energy use that doesn't benefit you is wrong. I would be surprised if the idea of telling purchasers of energy what they can do with it, or computers what calculations they are allowed to make, will find much purchase in the United States.

PoW incentivizes renewable energy development. It's certainly not rolling it back.

It used to also incentivize GPU production, but as of today that has been diminished as well. Instead it is only current asset holders who reap the rewards.

EDIT: Edited to include at least one source on the connections between PoW and renewable energy. This just scratches the surface though. https://squareup.com/us/en/press/bcei-white-paper

Or you can memorize 12 words. Not saying this should be the common practice or that everyone should do it, but having the ability to store your wealth in your mind is useful.

Patently obvious? I think there are multiple plausible explanations. Building things people want gives credibility.

I find it more bizarre people have such passionate anger towards others.

Study of money is very scant in the modern education system. Looking down on people newly exposed and interested in economics is boorish. I also believe there are incentives ingrained in our society to keep some of this knowledge "secret", as you say.

Gave up their rights by "illegally" protesting, huh? So basically if you protest the government, and that government says your protest is illegal, you lose your rights. I don't see that being such a healthy path for a free society.

So if I'm understanding this correctly, you had the device set to let in ambient sound, but a motor vehicle slamming on the brakes was filtered out, and you consider this to be a good thing? Sounds dangerous to me.

Amazing book. I think the concepts around the whole Uplift trilogy are great. The first one was a little tough for me to get through, but the next two are among my all time favorites. It's interesting to think about the potential of different species.

People looking for a decentralized store of value and access to a form of banking and payments would not consider it a waste of resources at all. I think that is a very privileged position. I would recommend reading the work of Alex Gladstein, CSO of the Human Rights Foundation, for stories and data from all over the world from people living under corrupt or authoritarian government who consider this technology a lifeline. This is just the tip of the iceberg of the value Bitcoin can and does provide the world.

If you only squabble is proof of work, there are plenty of resources available detailing why proof of work is important to the fairness, security, and decentralization of the system. Incentives will ensure people working on or promoting any other blockchain will attack proof of work, because they know they can no longer compete with Bitcoin on security in a proof of work system, but that does not make it superior. I will not go into my personal feelings about proof of work vs proof of stake, but there is plenty of writing out there delving into the tradeoffs.

As someone who hangs their clothes on a drying line, and doesn't put Christmas lights up, I think those 2 uses of energy (which surpass the energy used for proof of work) are far more wasteful, but I am happy that the people who do value those activities are allowed to partake in them without demonization.

I don't know him personally so I could certainly be mistaken, but from listening to him speak/write and based on his charitable giving I don't get the impression at all that Jack is motivated by riches. I think he is genuinely interested in Bitcoin as a tool for advancing humanity. I also don't get the impression he is interested in 'crypto'. I guess it remains to be seen though.

Decentralization and censorship resistance matter very much to the people who want bitcoin to succeed and become the native currency of the internet and the world, as does a nearly impossible to change monetary policy. Bitcoin has made very deliberate tradeoffs to ensure these properties. PoS is just the same system we currently have, where the central banks and exchanges are the ones who profit off holding all the coins. If you're analyzing the technology by what can most efficiently keep track of 1s and 0s, obviously a blockchain isn't the answer, PoS included. For creating a new money to remove the purse strings from the control of central bankers, of course the Tech matters.

The bond market is over 100 trillion. Why would people buy bonds returning low fixed interest rates in depreciating currencies if bitcoin with a fixed total supply becomes the global reserve currency? Gold is currently at a 10 trillion dollar market cap, and is a pretty small part of the global financial system at this point. The odds are absolutely not zero.

This is only true if you don't think Bitcoin is solving an important problem. For me, I think it is solving arguably the most important problem. That being said, even if I think clothes dryers (which use more energy than bitcoin) aren't solving a very important problem, I don't try and tell people they are bad or immoral or destroying the environment because they use clothes dryers.

Sorry, I am not sure I completely understand your argument. You expect the energy used for Tesla cars to more easily migrate to greener energy? Bitcoin mining is completely location independent and is able to migrate to cheaper (which as renewable energy tech improves will equal greener) energy much easier than an individual tesla owner can.

How about mass transit, bicycles, running, walking. Lets stop using airplanes and use blimps instead. Maybe there are benefits to using energy? Energy usage is how society and technology advances.

The same argument people made against Tesla saying why electric cars weren't really better than combustion engine cars. They said Tesla cars use a lot of energy, much of which comes from coal and other dirty sources. What a joke that Elon is making this argument.