I'm starting to hate bitcoin
and its ilk. The algorithm approaches genius in its nonobvious but clever solution to a perceived problem, not unlike the invention of the automatic transmission which uses braking(!) to effect the changing of gears, but the sheer amount of energy expended in the production of literally nothing is starting to annoy me.
Yes, this one of my complaints about it too. Gold doesn't require constant expenditure of energy to store value.
So one could say that once the externalised cost is internalised, the value of bitcoin has a friction or drag that gold does not.
The so-called "value of bitcoin" is based on nothing. Nothing more than what it's originator claims it has. Since it's not backed by anything, its value can swing widely, as it's based purely on speculation.
August 7th, 2017 9:10pm
Bitcoin also has a severe design flaw. Every once in awhile, the reward for mining is halved, eventually going to zero.
That means, after awhile, there's almost no incentive for miners to maintain the network, just transaction fees.
It also isn't anonymous. There's a public record of all transactions. When police start linking addresses to people, they can break anonymity.
August 7th, 2017 9:37pm
The "value of bitcoin" has an upper bound, the cost of mining. However, it has no lower bound.
August 7th, 2017 9:38pm
An EMP would "delete" Bitcoin. The run up in price is fascinating, but it's way to crazy to consider now.
"Gold doesn't require constant expenditure of energy to store value."
It does require a huge amount of energy to extract, I wouldn't be surprised to find it's worse than bitcoin.
"It does require a huge amount of energy to extract, I wouldn't be surprised to find it's worse than bitcoin."
"Since it's not backed by anything, its value can swing widely, as it's based purely on speculation."
Just like modern fiat currency then?