You forgot to mention, that traditional money are only useful as long as people believe that they have value. So, at some point there is always trust of one people to other people about meaning and value of some things. With this in mind, traditional blockchains are no different from traditional money. And there are also other blockchains (BFT-consensus-based clusters) which don't exchibit many limitations of traditional blockchains, including energy consumption, transfer fees and performance (which could scale far beyond of capabilities of traditional payment systems).
P.S. it does not worth to try to attack me as if I'm blockchain entusiast (I'm not).
I debate. I try not to take these things personally. If it feels like an attack I'm sorry and it isn't written with that intent. I feel we need to speak up against crypto as it's both a fraud and an ecological problem.
Traditional money is backed by a government. That's a huge difference. You have a central controlling body that regulates everything. This includes fraud prevention which is rampant as I mentioned.
I'm familiar with other blockchains with various levels of costs energy wise. But then you get back to the problem of fair distribution of the funds etc. as they aren't "earned" via mining. They are all "unproven" at scale, bitcoin doesn't scale but we know it sort of works...
There's a reason none of these coins gained traction in the mass market. I don't have as much of a problem with those coins as opposed to bitcoin et. al.
Great. Then let's continue debate (I really like such an approach).
If we omit dictatorships for brevity, then we may assume that government is backed by people who elected that government. So, it's still people trust behind money value.
Mining is not only way to earn. For example, in Radix network, "mining" is consequence of supporting and maintaining reliable network node and being recognized by community as a reliable node runner). In other words, this basically is no different from getting paid for providing services to community.
Yep. I'm pretty much comparing it to democracies we live in or trust.
Maintaining a node is a form of energy spend but yes. If it's a small energy overhead I don't have as much of a problem with it. There's the lack of regulation which has some advantages. But a lot of times crypto people gloss over the disadvantages. Commodity markets are highly regulated against "pump and dump" which in the case of crypto is just unavoidable as there's no tracking.
Even if a government made it illegal. Because of the nature of crypto a person could be in a different country and perform the fraud. I think a lot of people have a view of "yes it's a pyramid scheme, let's get in, make money and get out...". There's very heavy FOMO and misinformation involved. Celebrities are peddling this and very few people understand the implications. I'm not an economist, but it looks to me like a house of cards.
We see market collapses in stocks and commodities. But governments bail us out when this happens. Here, people will be left without their savings. Exchanges and wallets might disappear overnight. Yes, they were wrong to put money there... But honestly, the level of misinformation out there... I don't blame the people who do that.
You forgot to mention, that traditional money are only useful as long as people believe that they have value. So, at some point there is always trust of one people to other people about meaning and value of some things. With this in mind, traditional blockchains are no different from traditional money. And there are also other blockchains (BFT-consensus-based clusters) which don't exchibit many limitations of traditional blockchains, including energy consumption, transfer fees and performance (which could scale far beyond of capabilities of traditional payment systems).
P.S. it does not worth to try to attack me as if I'm blockchain entusiast (I'm not).
I debate. I try not to take these things personally. If it feels like an attack I'm sorry and it isn't written with that intent. I feel we need to speak up against crypto as it's both a fraud and an ecological problem.
Traditional money is backed by a government. That's a huge difference. You have a central controlling body that regulates everything. This includes fraud prevention which is rampant as I mentioned.
I'm familiar with other blockchains with various levels of costs energy wise. But then you get back to the problem of fair distribution of the funds etc. as they aren't "earned" via mining. They are all "unproven" at scale, bitcoin doesn't scale but we know it sort of works...
There's a reason none of these coins gained traction in the mass market. I don't have as much of a problem with those coins as opposed to bitcoin et. al.
Great. Then let's continue debate (I really like such an approach).
If we omit dictatorships for brevity, then we may assume that government is backed by people who elected that government. So, it's still people trust behind money value.
Mining is not only way to earn. For example, in Radix network, "mining" is consequence of supporting and maintaining reliable network node and being recognized by community as a reliable node runner). In other words, this basically is no different from getting paid for providing services to community.
Yep. I'm pretty much comparing it to democracies we live in or trust.
Maintaining a node is a form of energy spend but yes. If it's a small energy overhead I don't have as much of a problem with it. There's the lack of regulation which has some advantages. But a lot of times crypto people gloss over the disadvantages. Commodity markets are highly regulated against "pump and dump" which in the case of crypto is just unavoidable as there's no tracking.
Even if a government made it illegal. Because of the nature of crypto a person could be in a different country and perform the fraud. I think a lot of people have a view of "yes it's a pyramid scheme, let's get in, make money and get out...". There's very heavy FOMO and misinformation involved. Celebrities are peddling this and very few people understand the implications. I'm not an economist, but it looks to me like a house of cards.
We see market collapses in stocks and commodities. But governments bail us out when this happens. Here, people will be left without their savings. Exchanges and wallets might disappear overnight. Yes, they were wrong to put money there... But honestly, the level of misinformation out there... I don't blame the people who do that.
Energy consumed by node is close to just running a personal computer for usual purposes. There is no mining or other meaningless energy waste.