You write about markets like they are omnipotent, benevolent gods which they aren't. Markets fail all the time. It's a large part of what economists spend their time studying. Take an intro to game theory course and you can find all sorts of structures that lead to non-socially beneficial outcomes, the prisoner's dilemma being a classic example.
There's nothing about markets nor cryptocurrencies that guarantees that they efficiently select for the currency that requires the least electricity. You completely ignore social alignment issues as well as inertia.
Yes, markets can be wrong, but baselessly dismissing market data is plain dumb. Until market is shown wrong, the value that market assigns to something is at least some evidence of it’s true value.
Also, sorry to burst your bubble, but universe doesn’t care about socially beneficial outcomes. If a thing has valuable characteristics, no matter how socially harmful you may perceive it to be - those characteristics will not go anywhere.
So right now you’re basically arguing that bitcoin isn’t valuable because you don’t like what it’s valued for. There’s nothing wrong with that, but at least admit how highly subjective and contrary to available evidence that opinion is.
> Yes, markets can be wrong, but baselessly dismissing market data is plain dumb. Until market is shown wrong, the value that market assigns to something is at least some evidence of it’s true value.
Do you have the ability to show that PoS is NOT as secure as PoW?
> Also, sorry to burst your bubble, but universe doesn’t care about socially beneficial outcomes.
No shit. Never said it was. In fact when I mentioned market failures I made it explicit that I believe this to be true.
> So right now you’re basically arguing that bitcoin isn’t valuable because you don’t like what it’s valued for. There’s nothing wrong with that, but at least admit how highly subjective and contrary to available evidence that opinion is.
What the fuck are you talking about?? I never said anything remotely related to this. I said that your idea of "PoW is never wasteful" was meaningless. Maybe you were paused from posting on HN for straw manning?
> Do you have the ability to show that PoS is NOT as secure as PoW?
yes. if you spend enough time offline - there is no possible way for you to be sure that you've synchronised to genuine chain without trusting a third party. that problem is not solvable under PoS and that problem is exactly what PoW was designed to solve.
> I never said anything remotely related to this.
you did, by implying that markets value bitcoin incorrectly.
you also didn't show that "PoW is not wasteful" is incorrect (note that i never said "PoW is never wasteful", it's wasteful when nobody needs the proof that is being produced, but as long as bitcoin price is not zero, that proof is useful and therefore not wasteful), the statement that "if somebody can do what PoW does for less energy then PoW is wasteful" requires you to prove that somebody can actually do that before you can claim that PoW is wasteful.
It's pretty simple, if it costs you 1 dollar to mine a bitcoin and someone (the market) wants to buy that bitcoin for 2 dollars, that cost is worth it.
It doesn't matter what that cost is, if it's 1 dollar in energy or 1 dollar in wages or whatever, it costs $1 and you sell by $2, you profit, the cost was worth it.
There's nothing about markets nor cryptocurrencies that guarantees that they efficiently select for the currency that requires the least electricity. You completely ignore social alignment issues as well as inertia.