Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (171108)	4/29/2021 12:11:07 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217591

277 kilowatt-hours per transaction is crazy. When bitcoin first came out in 2009, my main criticism of it was the wastrel energy consumption in mining. I am surprised it is so high. Another problem is that the more efficient miners take over so the distributed nature of the network shrinks to a few main miners. Sure enough, that has now happened. When designing my patent-pending Cybermoney 20 years ago, one of my main concerns was that the Federal Reserve, politicians, CIA, NSA, Pentagon, etc would be very ill-disposed to US$ being made obsolete. Being very well armed and capable of delivering polonium 210, novichok, thallium, tomahawk missiles, bullets, atomic bombs or good old ice picks they would not hesitate to eliminate the threat, legally if easy to do, with extreme prejudice if not. Half a dozen bitcoin mining operations could be eliminated in minutes. Or simultaneously. My system will be distributed, not concentrated. As per my gang warfare protocol as a 12 year old, the method will be opposition choosing to join our much better gang. A CIA agent with my MMT in their back pocket will not wish to destroy their value. Bitcoin doesn't work like that. For the CIA agents to get paid, they need USD to continue and bitcoin to not. Casper has partly solved the energy problem. Proof of stake with punishment is part of my protocol too. So they are on the right track. But still barking up the wrong tree. Given 277 kw-hours per transaction, we can put a fork in bitcoin, so to speak! It's done. Casper [and maybe some other Cyberdough is a better bet] Dogecoin is the most valuable joke ever I guess. Writing a joke worth $billions is hilarious. Recommendation = short bitcoin On the other hand: Bitcoin could function as a bank's capital and lending of it could be done as bitcoin credits issued by the bank, based on the creditworthiness of the bank, with the actual bitcoins sitting motionless in a wallet in a vault. But that would require governments to accept the bank as an operating entity within their territory. I can't see why they would want to do that. They would surely tax such transactions at eye-watering rates that would give them the same profits as governments enjoy by diluting their fiat money day by day at some 10% a year [and faster these days]. Such a bitcoin banking system would be good in a country like Zimbabwe because the local money is dead and US$ charges a huge annual royalty on all US$ by way of dilution. On the third hand: A country like New Zealand might benefit from using bitcoin as the unit of currency because it would enable a common currency that like-minded countries could all use, without any of them diluting or otherwise wrecking the shared money. The euro is a dud because the bosses dictate dilution and who gets the loot. Greece might miss out while Belgium gets paid big heaps of newly printed euros. With bitcoin no country could dilute other countries and exchange rate hassles and costs would be gone. Maybe little countries could gang up with bitcoin to defend themselves against the royalty charges by the big countries with internationally used money. But I still dislike the wastrel energy consumption and inability to use actual bitcoins to buy an ice cream. I don't want a bank holding my bitcoins and the energy cost is too high. Etc Mqurice