It doesn't matter how "energy intensive" something is. What matters is that people pay for it voluntarily. Author doesn’t mention or complain about the massive energy used by centralized systems such as Visa, Amex, Mastercard or the state regulated banking system that moves fiat dollars around (electronic fiat consumes huge energy).
Just as oil is used to generate electricity to mine bitcoin, oil is also used to run equipment to mine gold. Very similar.
The store of value comes from demand for it by the free market. It has nothing to do with the energy required. BTC’s success to date is evidence it has stored value to those that bought hold it.
Bitcoin is the new gold. Bitcoin is a money, not a substitute for lending/investment. It should be compared with monetary silver, gold, coins and notes. Most bank deposits reflect the estimated future value of loans, as does other debt/stock. Bitcoin (as a money) gives people the ability to use the equivalent of gold on a network, to be able to earn and spend in a gold equivalent in the modern world. Its portability and potential for privacy also allows for avoidance of currency controls. Gold once served as money on a global basis. This lasted for hundreds of years and through periods of massive economic growth. Bitcoin has the same characteristics along with network portability and self-executing contracts. Also, I would think of it in terms of countries. Bitcoin is the people's money. Borders don't matter any more than with gold, except in collection of taxes.
People think of money as being moved from place to place. Bitcoin doesn't work that way. It exists everywhere and nowhere. Typically constraints on "moving" money are a primary control. Bitcoin renders this moot. It removes the choke points that become checkpoints.
The inventor of Bitcoin is "Satoshi," an anonymous individual. Satoshi’s true innovation was the elimination of the need for a central authority. It was not the blockchain. There is a lot of confusion out there about this topic. Bitcoin is trustless, a feature which derives from DISTRIBUTED VALIDATION (each transaction is validated by a mathematical calculation that requires a lot of compute power). This is the key concept most don't recognize about Bitcoin. The blockchain itself is not what creates the decentralized, distributed validation. In many articles, authors use the term "blockchain" to avoid saying “bitcoin” or “cryptocurrency.” When they do this they are often saying that they want a central authority. A blockchain can be used in a centralized payment system. Using blockchain and having a central authority does not require any new innovation. In other words, it’s a complete waste of time and money to build a blockchain-based system that relies on a central authority. Those systems already exist (Visa and Mastercard are centralized payment systems) and they won’t benefit from using aspects of a blockchain or BTC. Banks see Bitcoin coming, but have no idea how to deal with it. There is no benefit in "blockchain tech" for anyone, nor is it a new technology. Bitcoin is the innovation, the blockchain is one of its tools. Blockchain without Bitcoin is like wireless with wires.
Trustlessness is the sole greatness of bitcoin. Every interesting feature flows from that.
Sidenote: many complain about the Mt. Gox failure. That was not a fault of Bitcoin. The other exchanges did just fine. Exchanges can be hacked and robbed just like an old-school bank. Security comes from people (put your bitcoin on a hard wallet), not from the bitcoin itself. Rule #1 in Bitcoin, if you don't have the only copy of the private keys, it's not your money.
It doesn't matter how "energy intensive" something is. What matters is that people pay for it voluntarily. Author doesn’t mention or complain about the massive energy used by centralized systems such as Visa, Amex, Mastercard or the state regulated banking system that moves fiat dollars around (electronic fiat consumes huge energy).
Just as oil is used to generate electricity to mine bitcoin, oil is also used to run equipment to mine gold. Very similar.
The store of value comes from demand for it by the free market. It has nothing to do with the energy required. BTC’s success to date is evidence it has stored value to those that bought hold it.
Bitcoin is the new gold. Bitcoin is a money, not a substitute for lending/investment. It should be compared with monetary silver, gold, coins and notes. Most bank deposits reflect the estimated future value of loans, as does other debt/stock. Bitcoin (as a money) gives people the ability to use the equivalent of gold on a network, to be able to earn and spend in a gold equivalent in the modern world. Its portability and potential for privacy also allows for avoidance of currency controls. Gold once served as money on a global basis. This lasted for hundreds of years and through periods of massive economic growth. Bitcoin has the same characteristics along with network portability and self-executing contracts. Also, I would think of it in terms of countries. Bitcoin is the people's money. Borders don't matter any more than with gold, except in collection of taxes.
People think of money as being moved from place to place. Bitcoin doesn't work that way. It exists everywhere and nowhere. Typically constraints on "moving" money are a primary control. Bitcoin renders this moot. It removes the choke points that become checkpoints.
The inventor of Bitcoin is "Satoshi," an anonymous individual. Satoshi’s true innovation was the elimination of the need for a central authority. It was not the blockchain. There is a lot of confusion out there about this topic. Bitcoin is trustless, a feature which derives from DISTRIBUTED VALIDATION (each transaction is validated by a mathematical calculation that requires a lot of compute power). This is the key concept most don't recognize about Bitcoin. The blockchain itself is not what creates the decentralized, distributed validation. In many articles, authors use the term "blockchain" to avoid saying “bitcoin” or “cryptocurrency.” When they do this they are often saying that they want a central authority. A blockchain can be used in a centralized payment system. Using blockchain and having a central authority does not require any new innovation. In other words, it’s a complete waste of time and money to build a blockchain-based system that relies on a central authority. Those systems already exist (Visa and Mastercard are centralized payment systems) and they won’t benefit from using aspects of a blockchain or BTC. Banks see Bitcoin coming, but have no idea how to deal with it. There is no benefit in "blockchain tech" for anyone, nor is it a new technology. Bitcoin is the innovation, the blockchain is one of its tools. Blockchain without Bitcoin is like wireless with wires.
Trustlessness is the sole greatness of bitcoin. Every interesting feature flows from that.
Sidenote: many complain about the Mt. Gox failure. That was not a fault of Bitcoin. The other exchanges did just fine. Exchanges can be hacked and robbed just like an old-school bank. Security comes from people (put your bitcoin on a hard wallet), not from the bitcoin itself. Rule #1 in Bitcoin, if you don't have the only copy of the private keys, it's not your money.