undefined | Better HN

0 pointsFlyingSnake5y ago0 comments

I almost typed a snarky remark, but then realized that you make a valid point with that analogy. However the analogy feels a little weak to me:

> We even had to go to war to make sure we have enough oil

I don't see countries going to war over BTC (or the mining pool) as they already have cornered all the fiat currencies in a tight system. All they could do is sabotage the BTC system and make it less lucrative for normal public.

0 comments

lowkey5y ago

> I don't see countries going to war over BTC (or the mining pool) as they already have cornered all the fiat currencies in a tight system.

I think that's the point here. Unlike BTC which is powered by Proof of Work (POW), the US Dollar is powered by Proof of Violence (POV). As a result the full accounting for the externalities caused by US dollars would have to include the cost of supporting and using the largest military industrial complex in the history of the world to protect the market for oil being denominated in US Dollars (petrodollars).

smolder5y ago

Fiat is not powered by "proof of violence" because violence is not needed for it to function. It is maintained by social contract and the threat of violence, because otherwise it could only depend on trust, and trust is very expensive, as Bitcoin proves.

TimJRobinson5y ago

You need to have an army and weapons to enforce that threat, which costs a lot of energy to maintain.

1 more reply

glitchc5y ago

Yet! Taking over mining power or electricity resources could certainly propel wars of the future if Bitcoin becomes the reserve currency of the world.

fredfoobar5y ago

I'm sensing a small nuance missed here, I'll clarify pro-actively: Adding more energy to your mining operation won't result in more bitcoin for you, you will only make the network more secure. Mining bitcoin is mostly about securing the bitcoin network and there is a small reward for doing so.

glitchc5y ago

~600K USD per block is not “small” :). Mining power is directly correlated to cost of electricity. Most mining is located in electricity-rich districts for good reason. It’s the only cost-effective way to sustain the network. Those regions are scarce across the globe, ergo in high demand.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsFlyingSnake5y ago0 comments

I almost typed a snarky remark, but then realized that you make a valid point with that analogy. However the analogy feels a little weak to me:

> We even had to go to war to make sure we have enough oil

0 comments

lowkey5y ago

> I don't see countries going to war over BTC (or the mining pool) as they already have cornered all the fiat currencies in a tight system.

smolder5y ago

TimJRobinson5y ago

You need to have an army and weapons to enforce that threat, which costs a lot of energy to maintain.

1 more reply

glitchc5y ago

Yet! Taking over mining power or electricity resources could certainly propel wars of the future if Bitcoin becomes the reserve currency of the world.

fredfoobar5y ago

glitchc5y ago

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse