Sure, but that doesn't invalidate the calculation of branch energy usage for the purposes of the comparison. It's still a function of how society interacts with money; it's baked into our financial institution infrastructure. Removing bank branches would certainly reduce the carbon footprint of that system, much like additional technological and process improvements to blockchain technology and cryptocurrency transactions will improve the carbon footprint of that system.
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
Up to you bro. Don’t regret in couple of years. Your $3-5 coffee money each week could turn into apple car in 2025.
The point is not that "well banks don't need branches to operate" the point is "human civilisation as we know it is not going to stop using bank branches 'because bitcoin'".
If you do think people will suddenly no longer need bank branches "because bitcoin", you have zero clue about why people go to a bank branch.
I'd rather have the coffee.
Given that you don't seem to understand the concept of how a pyramid scheme works, here's a free hint: The constant need to convince other people they should "get in before you regret it" just reinforces the conclusion that it's a pyramid scheme.
That's not what cryptocoins do. They just shift the centralization from hardly accoutanble people to even less accountable people.
No, I'm a software engineer who actually knows his ****.
You're wrong.
Oh no, that's not my point at all. I'm not a Bitcoin maximalist in any way, and I don't think traditional banking is inherently bad, wrong, or going to be completely replaced by cryptocurrency. My argument is that while Bitcoin energy usage (and, by extension, energy usage of the networks that power blockchain technology overall) is not zero, neither is the energy powering the banking systems.
I believe my original quote was "Is Bitcoin energy-intensive? Yes. But so is, well, every other mining operation and financial system." The quote from the Nasdaq article that sums up my feelings about the argument that Bitcoin is "bad" because it uses a lot of energy is this: "The impacts of gold and banking on the environment relative to Bitcoin are much greater than mainstream narratives suggest."
There is not a single process being discussed in this forum that would not benefit from efficiency improvements and moves to renewable energy. I just think dismissing Bitcoin because of the belief that it's a pyramid scheme or because it "uses a lot of energy" is at best, shortsighted and at worst, intentionally misdirecting or misrepresenting what blockchain technology is trying to accomplish. It's a nascent technology - it needs to be developed, it needs to be iterated upon, and it needs time for the markets to shake out the most useful use cases for the world at large.
And this is why people see it as a pyramid scheme.
You insist it's not, and that people should invest in it.
That's literally the MO of a pyramid scheme.
Actually, I've been pretty clear in all of my posts that if you don't see the value of blockchain technology, Bitcoin, or any other crypto, it's fine NOT to invest. In fact, you shouldn't.
Blockchain is a technology. People have doubted the internet, solar energy, automobiles, television, and any other number of technologies over the course of human history. Hell, the Printing Press was once criticized as a tool primarily to spread propaganda (Medium - "How the Printing Press and the Papacy's Corrupt Practices Accelerated Martin Luther's Reform Movement").
The term pyramid scheme is being thrown around so casually in this (and many other forums). Our entire economy here in the US thrives on ideas being sold to investors and developed for profit. Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Shark Tank - how are these not "pyramid schemes" by the same standards being applied to blockchain technology?
EDIT: Definition of a pyramid scheme: "A form of investment (illegal in the US and elsewhere) in which each paying participant recruits two further participants, with returns being given to early participants using money contributed by later ones."
This is not how cryptocurrencies work. People like me shill for blockchain because we believe two fundamental things:
- The blockchain technology is going to play a major role in the advancement of human society over the coming decades
- Metcalfe's Law (SOURCE) applies and the more people that use blockchain tech, the more valuable blockchain becomes
Last edited:
I mean, I'd use sarcastic quotes around "thrives" given recent history but sure.
Someone has an idea. They or others invest money, to produce something people want, who pay money for that thing, and make a profit.
With bitcoin there is no thing that people want. It's just investing in the idea that people will invest in the idea that people will invest in the idea that people will invest....
Ad-driven, privacy abusing **** like Google is also technology.
You can't just dismiss criticisms and say "well it's just technology, people were scared of X before too".
Being a technology doesn't make it inherently good or inherently benign.
That's the thing that many on this thread are missing: there are real companies making real products that people are using. They have a rapidly growing user base. If you have any experience in tech startups, you can see they are on the path to success.
Every time I've pointed some out, the anti-crypto commenters just ignore those cases and keep pivoting back to why they hate bitcoin, which is a token, not a company.
I've worked with several actually, go on..
You know that the success:failure rate for "tech startups" is ridiculously low right? Like, miniscule.
Of the small % that actually provide a financial profit to the VC investors, the vast majority are simply bought out by bigger tech companies for the "talent", and the product/service is either left to rot, killed off immediately or essentially neutered.
You're gonna have to be more specific, which one?
I don't know many roller coasters that go to the moon mate.
Ha, okay, how about "is built and continues to operate on the principle" of people monetizing ideas by seeking investors?
The statement that Bitcoin offers something no one wants is demonstrably false. You and I can debate how the product itself should be valued by the market, but the very existence of this thread proves that Bitcoin and blockchain offer something that at least some people want.
"Ad-driven, privacy abuse" are symptoms and behaviors enabled by technology, which in Google's case is the ability to index and search across the entire internet more quickly and relevantly than its competitors. You could strip away those aspects and leave the fundamental tech unaffected. This example would be akin to saying "car accidents" or "street racing" are a technology.
I'm not outright dismissing criticisms of Bitcoin, but I am reacting to people (many of whom have perfectly legitimate concerns and criticisms) choosing to dismiss the technology behind Bitcoin outright. Instead, I'd rather use that criticism as a launching point to conversations, which are hopefully constructive.
--
FWIW, I do not appreciate when people "on my side" resort to tactics like name-calling, insulting others' intelligence, or making baseless and unsupported claims. Bitcoin as a product and blockchain as a technology are not perfect. But they're nascent. Given time and investment, I believe it can all make the world a better place.
My goal in debating with you and others in this forum is not to raise the price of Bitcoin by even a penny or to insult your beliefs. I've been involved and invested since 2014, and I want the technology to thrive because it is a powerful one with almost limitless potential.
Newsflash: People who have already invested in the pyramid scheme, want new investors.
"People believing in a product and seeking investors" is not the definition of a pyramid scheme, nor is it a phenomenon exclusive to pyramid schemes. This is aggressive and, I'm starting to believe, intentional over-simplification of the term in order to apply it to Bitcoin as a pejorative.
From Investopedia (SOURCE): "A pyramid scheme is an illegal investment scam based on a hierarchical setup of network marketing." Bitcoin is not hierarchical, and its value to me (both as a technology and as an investment) is completely independent of the single-digit number of people I've convinced to invest.
It's not a pyramid scheme because they're seeking investors. It's a pyramid scheme because more people buying into it is the only way existing people actually make money back from their investment.
(You could say that's also true of the stock market, but the stock market is at least somewhat based on real values, rather than thin air.)