Using Bitcoin and sustainable in the same sentence is a joke, surely?
Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme that's wrecking the environment.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Looking for a Manager With Experience in Cryptocurrency
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme that's wrecking the environment.
Apple should look on Reddit for a manager. There are lots of people on said site who think they are the next Wolf of WallStreet.
Blockchain technology is brand new. To compare its development to, say, the internet's, we're still in the late-80's stage where the first commercially viable applications are just now coming online. Who could have accurately valued the business and commerce happening over the web in 2021 from 1988? Very few people, if anyone.
No one doubts the value of the internet now, which is where we'll be (in my opinion) within 5 - 10 years. Crypto now is definitely a gamble, and definitely comes with risks. But flat-out dismissing a nascent technology because it can be used in criminal enterprises (see also: internet, cell phones, fiat currency, boats, airplanes, cars, guns) or negatively impacts the environment (see also: internet again, any transportation industry, any mining operation, weapons R&D, most manufacturing) is short-sighted.
Is it not for you? Totally fine. But the potential for blockchain technology and crypto as a store of wealth is staggering, and its active development is contributing to green energy tech development, financial system reforms, general global wealth redistribution, and a host of other things I can't even think of off the top of my head. Of course Apple is looking at it, as are so many other forward-thinking companies.
Instead of dismissing or banning new tech, let's develop it to its maximum potential.
No one doubts the value of the internet now, which is where we'll be (in my opinion) within 5 - 10 years. Crypto now is definitely a gamble, and definitely comes with risks. But flat-out dismissing a nascent technology because it can be used in criminal enterprises (see also: internet, cell phones, fiat currency, boats, airplanes, cars, guns) or negatively impacts the environment (see also: internet again, any transportation industry, any mining operation, weapons R&D, most manufacturing) is short-sighted.
Is it not for you? Totally fine. But the potential for blockchain technology and crypto as a store of wealth is staggering, and its active development is contributing to green energy tech development, financial system reforms, general global wealth redistribution, and a host of other things I can't even think of off the top of my head. Of course Apple is looking at it, as are so many other forward-thinking companies.
Instead of dismissing or banning new tech, let's develop it to its maximum potential.
Almost all your assertions are flawed, no matter how many buzzwords you use.
I'm guessing this role is related to China's digital currency and Apple accepting it as payment.
The issue is that cryptocurrencies as they are now are solely speculative, they are not a source of wealth, they are a way to transfer wealth from newcomers to first comers.
Blockchain technology expands way beyond the markets it would be like saying Apple is nothing more than a ticker symbol ignoring the fact they produce actual products. Large companies and governments use blockchains as a way to securely record, store and track data and soon distribute it. That's not misinformation cant speak 1st hand for banks but can for the US government the DOD and Intel community use it every day and revaluate multiple chains offered by large companies like IBM, Cisco and Google as we find more capabilities with the tech. Sure people get ripped off with scam coins like Doge but these people would just lose it on some penny stock or lottery tickets (Which the rich manipulate as well). Anyone who has bought into a solid project during or before last December is up in value from any low point before even from the highs of 2017. So as Dave Ramsey says you haven't lost until you sold.
Crypto energy usage is not perfect, but it's constantly iterating and improving. It's a computer product - think of how efficient that tech is today than, say, 20 years ago. There is wealth in developing and driving efficiency in powerful new technology (see: Moore's Law), and that's what serious crypto miners are trying to do. A significant percentage of crypto mining is already using renewable energy wherever possible, though I won't quote a figure because there is no agreed-upon methodology for calculating that. Some interesting reads are below, though, if you're interested.
Business Insider: BTC Bridge to Renewable Future
CNBC: Ark Analyst Says 76% of Crypto Energy Use from Renewables
BBC: Bitcoin Mining Council to report renewable energy usage
As for the idea that Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme, I don't follow the logic. By definition, a pyramid scheme participant drives their wealth generation as a direct function of people they recruit. Crypto is a young and volatile market, yes, but there is no way to directly profit from bringing other people into it. It functions much more closely to the stock market (which, depending on your point of view, could also be corrupt and a significant driver of criminal and environment-destroying activity) than to any pyramid scheme.
I can't really argue with this point. What I will argue, though, is that skepticism of value and misconceptions about how technology can be applied broadly occurs with just about any new technology. And that this truth doesn't invalidate the utility of that technology.
Two of my favorite examples are the automobile and, of course, the internet.
Get A Horse! America’s Skepticism Toward the First Automobiles | The Saturday Evening Post
The inventor who claimed the first U.S. car ever sold recalls the birth of the industry and the general public skepticism about automobiles.
www.saturdayeveningpost.com
Depends on the way the currency is transferred.
for example:
Energy consumption KWh per transaction:
Visa: 0,00649
Cash:0,08 per printed banknote
Ripple:0,00001133
Bitcoin:118
source: Deutsche bank
As many have mentioned on this thread, not all crypto is bad for the environment. In fact, some are carbon neutral (proof of stake) and strive to be carbon negative! Check out Algorand...a possible partnership with Apple isn't out of the question as Algorand is the most Eco-friendly crypto in existence:
cointelegraph.com
Algorand pledges carbon-negative blockchain
Algorand is teaming up with ClimateTrade to tackle carbon emissions.
I love the potential of Algorand as well if Apple was looking to create a sidechain it would be a serious contender in my view. Apple is large enough to make their own though if its going to stay internal.As many have mentioned on this thread, not all crypto is bad for the environment. In fact, some are carbon neutral (proof of stake) and strive to be carbon negative! Check out Algorand...a possible partnership with Apple isn't out of the question as Algorand is the most Eco-friendly crypto in existence:
Algorand pledges carbon-negative blockchain
Algorand is teaming up with ClimateTrade to tackle carbon emissions.
View attachment 1782308
Well...Facebook tried to acquire Algorand in 2019, but the Algo team rejected the deal, so you never know...
It is amazing to see such strong opinions coupled with so much ignorance. "There are no real world uses of crypto." This is blatantly false as a simple google search will tell you. Consider Terra: https://rbf.capital/terra-luna-token-analysis-and-valuation/
It is used for settlement for >2 million real world users because it is faster and cheaper:
"Merchants who accept Terra get paid in 6 seconds and pay 0,6% fee in comparison to current 7-day settlement period and 2,8 % credit card fee."
In Argentina, the government is printing the peso with abandon, leading to inflation of >30%. The locals have started adopting DAI, which is a Stablecoin based on the USD. The users are able to preserve the value of their work effort through crypto, not the peso.
www.coindesk.com
These are legitimate, real-world uses that are neither pyramid schemes nor terrorist activities.
It is used for settlement for >2 million real world users because it is faster and cheaper:
"Merchants who accept Terra get paid in 6 seconds and pay 0,6% fee in comparison to current 7-day settlement period and 2,8 % credit card fee."
In Argentina, the government is printing the peso with abandon, leading to inflation of >30%. The locals have started adopting DAI, which is a Stablecoin based on the USD. The users are able to preserve the value of their work effort through crypto, not the peso.
Why Argentines Are Turning From Dollars to Stablecoins Like DAI
A cocktail of high inflation, devaluation and lack of access to U.S. dollars has led Argentines to find in the decentralized stablecoin a way to protect their battered incomes.
These are legitimate, real-world uses that are neither pyramid schemes nor terrorist activities.
Counterargument: that was 1995, and indeed, five years later, by 2000 pretty much everyone knew about it, many had internet access, even more had an email, etc.I can't really argue with this point. What I will argue, though, is that skepticism of value and misconceptions about how technology can be applied broadly occurs with just about any new technology. And that this truth doesn't invalidate the utility of that technology.
Two of my favorite examples are the automobile and, of course, the internet.
Get A Horse! America’s Skepticism Toward the First Automobiles | The Saturday Evening Post
The inventor who claimed the first U.S. car ever sold recalls the birth of the industry and the general public skepticism about automobiles.
In contrast, with cryptocurrencies, we're five to ten years in (depending on where you start counting) it's still the same speculative bubble, even though adoption of a new technology in 2020 should –in theory– be faster than in 1995. Then there's the endless list of new coins popping up every week, each one of them hoping to be the next one that gets pumped. Not very reassuring, to be honest.
So I do appreciate some of its aspects can be useful, but if a single individual (namely, Musk) has the power to send it careening, is that the kind of decentralisation we need? Centralisation can be good, it prevents whales from manipulating the market.
Yes, there's money to be made. But that money so far has only come from others buying into it, and let's be honest, at the end of the day you all count your gains in good old $$$.
Last edited:
If you think fiat money is corrupt, or improves inequality, boy, are you in for a ride with cryptocoins.
Most bank transfer and direct debit doesn't require credit cards in Germany. You pick a destination account number and off you go; rent, electricty, friend, etc. paid.
I'm not entirely sure that comparison holds, actually. The first commercially available internet was late 80's, and the technology originated in the 60's. Blockchain, the technology behind cryptocurrency, is a lot closer (in my opinion) to ARPANET than to Facebook. To your point about technology adoption, however, laypeople understand the potential value of scaling networks now relative to their understanding in the 60's much better. If that level of widespread comprehension had existed in '66 we wouldn't have needed to wait until '88 for commercial internet to become available.
Cryptocurrency is not a good "investment" now. It's highly speculative, and volatility is way high. I'm not trying to argue that anyone should move their wealth into crypto if they're not a believer. But I do think dismissing blockchain technology outright is a mistake.
EDIT: Clarified my position based on the distinction between cryptocurrency and blockchain technology.
Last edited:
Crypto is a large universe. You can get USDC which is pegged 1:1 to the US dollar and backed by deposits. Coinbase is a US-based, publicly listed, SEC-regulated firm that is one of the custodians.
USDC is not at all volatile compared to the US dollar. Coinbase will buy 1 USDC from you for $1.
People hear "crypto" and they think BTC or Doge. There are many Stablecoins that have the conveniences of crypto without the volatility. Not all crypto tokens are the same.
I mean, agreed 100%. You're correct, of course. It's difficult because the conflation between blockchain technology and cryptocurrency is high. Blockchain the technology will revolutionize the transfer of data (not just money) the way that the internet revolutionized the transfer of data.
EDIT: Original message updated to reflect the difference.
Although I haven’t seen the exact numbers for Sepa, Maestro, swift or Sofort ... ( the methods you are refering to I suppose) ... I kinda suspect that they will be in the same line as Visa ... anyway not zero... 😉
Would be interesting to know though.
Fully agree with this. Stablecoins and smart contracts are clearly the future of finance. It's just shocking to see all the comments here that are based on the belief that all of crypto amounts to dog-based coins used for pyramid schemes.
Really, to all of my fellow technologists reading this, do yourself a favor and learn about stablecoins and their uses before you dismiss the entire sector.
Right. Something like paying rent is almost invariably done either by a recurring payment, or a recurring debit. It's just banks talking to each other (or possibly even one and the same bank shifting from account A to B).
(SWIFT is more of an American standard, but the new EU-wide IBAN way of referring to bank accounts is from SWIFT. SEPA is a hideous overengineered they-didn't-understand-XML format to declare transfers/debits electronically. Maestro is an international debit card compatibility thing by MasterCard that I don't believe is relevant inside the EU, i.e. you can use your EU debit card to withdraw money outside the EU that way. Sofort, lastly, is a regretabble proprietary thing with security considerations so absurd, they violate many of your bank account ToSes… beware. Turns out giving a third party your credentials is a bad idea. Who knew?)
Unless your XML implementation for SEPA is frighteningly inefficient, I think it's extremely unlikely blockchain could ever come close in energy efficiency. Which, to its credit, is due to its cryptography.
It would be so sad if the crypto’s crashed again and the speculators lost all their money.