The most important factor is people‘s mindset towards global environment. If it continues to be consumerist it won‘t matter what money system you have. If fiat money serves consumerism they will opt for it instead of bitcoin. Only if people understand and accept our interconnections with and dependence on the web of life and the modest lifestyle this requires will there be a chance of survival. So mind decides, not money.
if returning to the gold standard was possible it would perhaps help rein in some of the GHG growth and consumption but it would not rein in GHG emissions enough.
I'm intrigued to see where Jason's thought process goes on this subject. In the meantime: 1) Isn't Ethereum a similar crypto to BitCoin? Are there any other similar crypto's to Bitcoin? Excuse my ignorance of crypto's. I wonder what the comparative energy needs are of Gold v Credit/Debt v Crypto 2) My gut feeling is that it isn't a good thing for our energy needs to keep increasing as Jason suggests. We're struggling to make any headway to diminish the use of fossil fuels. Increased energy consumption will make this main objective harder. More so when our limited timeframe is factored in. But Jason's end goal is spot on. We need to elevate those in poverty. Redistributing the hoarded wealth of our billionaire and multi-millionaire class seems like a better approach. 3) I'm struggling to make the connection between crypto and less war. The penny still hasn't dropped about how this dynamic works.
He has a video on how Bitcoin disincentivizes war. Ethereum and any other crypto cannot be compared to Bitcoin. It's the only fixed supply asset in the world. More finite than gold.
Interesting take on bitcoin! Won't bitcoin require continuous, long term uninterrupted universal digital (internet?) access at all times and locations to be useful? Not sure I would bet on that happening based on climate/biodiversity trends. Would people in remote areas need to resort to barter, assuming fiat money eventually disappears? Can we be sure there will be a maximum amount, or could some other entity start a parallel to bitcoin in the future?
We have to compare what the cost of bitcoin is environmentally against fiat currency that doesn't have any constraints and the consumptive power the amount of money able to generated means. If we went back to gold there would be less money around so less consumption of goods, same with bitcoin that has power constraints and ATM's/paywave etc are connected to the net, if it was bitcoin instead would anybody care.
@@antonyjh1234 deficit spending and borrowing and printing money and inflation to allow or cover this never seemed wise to me, because it means spending more than one actually has, so it uses up and discourages savings. Why would anyone especially a state want to end up as a net borrower? Its a system designed for bankers and lenders and against the People.
In the fiat currency world it’s incorrect to think of a deficit as an obligation to be paid off. The United States, quite a few other countries issues, and spends in its own currency. The government is the producer of money that does not create in the obligation to pay it off because in fact, the national debt is our money supply.. let me repeat this. There is a distinction for currency sovereign, and that they can issue money without obligation to any other entity to pay it off. Quite literally this is the act provisioning money to an economy means of exchange to an economy. The great problem of the third world is that they aren't in a position to really issue currency they can buy things internationally so when they take out debt in dollars they are subject to exchange rates and us interest rates. Bitcoin is under the control of billionaires. They own most of the asset. Bitcoin is exchanging access to finance from a government to billionaires.
This is one of the things I try to explain to people that in this debt based system, all money is someone's debt, whether central or commercial bank, all money is just bank debt and loans paid back make money disappear, just like taxes but where I disagree is the third world. As all money is debt and must be paid back, they aren't able to get into debt if they are going to default or if it can't be taxed out. For money to flow through society it must be able to come out again and the third world where banking might be some gold chains or cash under the mattress then it can't, the issue with third world people is they aren't able to get into debt because of the risk.
@@antonyjh1234 the "hiddenCost" of BTC is the POWER consumed to maintain itself. In other words there is a "Debt Obligation" paid in Kilowatts. Without that POWER it doesn't exist.
@@antonyjh1234 central bank money is not debt, not for currency sovereign. Because the currency sovereign is the originator of money from nothing. Commercial money differs from fiat currency in that it’s comes with a debt obligation. It has to be paid back, but even beyond that payment of principal is the interest charge. Depending on the duration and interest rate applied a borrower can be paying back 2, 3 maybe r times money that they borrowed. This is the case with the 30 year mortgage by the way it’s like 70% of the the money that a borrower forks over to the bank over 30 years. For nations borrow in dollars not in their currency, they are just as bad for the same circumstance as somebody who borrows money or mortgage. Dollar dominance is a problem. But one thing is very clear is the world and especially the third world developing world whatever the euphemism is these days I prefer the word global periphery in no way shape or form wants to become debt slaves to people like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. That’s another level of unmitigated evil that no one should be forced to become subject to. But my main point will be this you don’t need interest and you don’t need inflation to keep money in circulation and to prevent deflationary spirals. Is a thing called Freigeld, which is really a set of principles that should govern the monetary system. The most important element of it is to put a time limit on the store of value of money. People who hang onto money that hoard it, becomes subject to taxation. The word for this is demurrage, a term that originated in the shipping industry to prevent captains from leaving their vessels at dock overly long.
Bitcoin is not under the control of billionaires. Most of it belongs to regular people. It is not easily manipulated. Also, debt is not a good thing. You wrote a lot of words for saying, "I don't understand Bitcoin." Study harder.
Not really, he's saying making it harder to get money means less consumption which is logical enough, it might mean more emissions per dollar but because fiat money costs so little, I think around four cents per hundred dollars to create, then something harder to get will increase the value of the currency, it will be a way to reduce the amount of currency and if you compare the emissions or producing bitcoin to trillions of dollars issued to the world then bitcoin would be a the smaller emission value. Considering it costs banks around 40k per million issued do you think less emissions generating the money means less emissions with the millions issued? If we went back to a gold standard or hard money based on something, it could be the carbon value of a product, that doesn't change then money doesn't need to change its value, it fiat money produced just on the ability to take it out again has no constraints then why is fait money a better choice, environmentally to you?
What, next will you be selling an investment course in bitcoin? Crypto currency still requires fossil fuel energy to be generated. Maybe someday it won't. Tell us when and if that will be soon enough to offset global warming, and I'll be a bit more interested. Just saying that bitcoin is the future seems a bit shallow.
He's talking about money and how all money is bank debt, this money is issued at a very low cost and all money is a ticket to energy, so why is it not a valid thing to say if we cut down the amount of money in society then it will reduce overall energy consumption, because of the scarcity? I would say you are one of the masses that don't understand money is just bank debt, a bank, whether central or commercial wants as much of this debt into society as they can, central banks want the loans paid back so we have taxes, commercial banks want loans paid back so we have repayments, but their job is to get as much of it as they can into society, when it costs four cents per hundred dollars to create debt/money then he is saying having less of that ability is a good thing, how is that shallow? What might be shallow is as money is debt and we need to hold debt to live then will bitcoin be like this also and if that is the case then nothing has changed, better to give people food, shelter and medical for free then.
@@antonyjh1234 Having passed the NASD Series 3 license requirements and a futures advisor, I have some understanding of money. Getting away from fiat currency would be great, but then what? Crypto? Perhaps, but would governments, the World Bank and Central Banks agree to get on board. Unlikely. What I see Mr. Box trying to say that the overall energy expenditure (in terms of greenhouse gas emissions) built in today's money system could be lessened with a block-chain verified method of energy (work for money) exchange. So the question for Mr. Box is how and when will the crossover happen and will it be in time to reap any benefit from this form of currency production and exchange to offset global warming? Personally, I don't see that happening in time, but maybe. Perhaps Musk will convince dumbbell Trump to convert the $ to Doge, which would most likely collapse the world monetary system. Meanwhile the global temp keeps rising year after year as do GH gasses.
I agree -- Bitcoin is SQUANDERING ENERGY using vast compute to make more Bitcoin. In the deserts of Arizona a huge amount of energy AND WATER powers the search for more Bitcoin.
@@earthsystem What should the energy be used for? You use these data centres by using your computer or phone, Ai is supposed to use more than data centres, will you refuse to use ai?
Thanks for doing this work! 😊 The normies will come around, eventually. They will see how many problems Bitcoin solves one day. It gives me hope for a better world too.
Thunder bay Canada ,..historically a bitterly cold place, almost 2C at 7:00 am,...its happening friend. BitCoin represents a logarithmic increase in ENERGY consumption as it linearly increases in VALUE. I'm not so sure, it is the panacea we might think. Where ENERGY consumption is compared,.. its rival is Ai,..at this point in TIME one controls the other. Given an amount of TIME, ...these roles will switch. Given Mankinds history,...one will be secreted and destroyed. One thing is for certain, burning Oil is the root cause..
The ability of fiat money that costs so little to create, means we have a greater access to energy, the increase in consumption of energy to create bitcoin could have a reduction in overall consumption. It costs 4 cents per hundred dollars to create fiat, if it costs more or if we went back to a gold standard then money can't be printed on a whim, the consumption of oil happens now because of money, reduce the amount then consumption reduces.
@@antonyjh1234 im not disagreeing, but there are many interconnections to Money, Oil, Ai, BitCoin, and of course Geo-politics , Power and Control. I think its fairly reasonable to include pride, prejudice and sheer folly to the mix as well, One thing is for certain about BTC tho,..it consumes Vast Quantities of POWER for transactions as well as its own sustenance in that it is never STATIC, whereas,...Gold is just a lump
@@-LightningRod- " One thing is for certain about BTC tho,..it consumes Vast Quantities of POWER for transactions as well as its own sustenance in that it is never STATIC, whereas,...Gold is just a lump" I disagree you should set the bar of what is certain or not. Vast, compared to the amount of energy consumed with money, what are you comparing it against? While gold may be a lump it requires oil in vast amounts in the form of diesel, in a normal 60 litre tank is the same amount of energy as my total electrical energy for 3.2 months in a sub tropical place over summer with the air con going 24-7. A huge amount of energy in each tank gets lost as heat, 70% for diesel and 75% for petrol and it takes 15% of the energy in oil to refine it into it's different products. If someone uses a tank a week for a year that is equal to 17 years of my total electrical energy, so gold is not emission free but could easily be seen as the more polluting.
@@antonyjh1234 Well,...as i posted in the earlier Post,...there are many inter-connections in that Money is not an island, nor is BTC, Gold or anything else for that matter, ...nothing ONLY exists in a vacuum. BTC is relatively easy to Quantify in that it takes POWER to TRANSACT. It will take a Logarithmic amount of POWER as its VALUE increases linearly, In short,...as the VALUE of BTC grows its DEMAND for POWER increase EXPONENTIALLY , Inevitably A.i. and BTC will become entwined. I believe that the POWER demands o0f these two similar yet different technologies is, ...uncharted.
Bitcoin not crypto is the first important distinction. Have a listen to this This guy puts it better ua-cam.com/video/aNPuGIX1xmY/v-deo.htmlsi=Qpj2STEWCgo0WAB8
I understand your words are constituting or containing a set form of words but I do not understand what you mean, are you able to explain in plain speak how ai will do this?
@@earthsystem we are many years away from that ever happening. Bank accounts are at risk of being hacked before Bitcoin will be, as it's an easier target.
This was one your most concise videos/lectures I've listened to. Also thank you for pointing out the original move from the gold standard was an international action not just and american one.
Unfortunately, Jason Box is very badly informed about the nature of monetary systems. The cryptocurrency ultimately finds its origin in billionaires. They have constructed an asset system that they control. They own the majority of bitcoin. Ultimately they control access to financing through it. On top of this on the energy cost of processing a transaction in bitcoin is insane. It's like burning up several tanks of gasoline to buy bubblegum. Inflation and interest rates by the way are two sides of the same economic power relation. Our monetary policies inject 2% inflation, intentionally into an economy as a measure to prevent deflationary spirals. But this inflation is not necessary at all, and neither is an interest rate to motivate commerce. Both are only wealth transfer from the poor to the rich.
@@GhostOnTheHalfShell I wasn;t sure of the energy cost connected to bitcoin just thought it was high, so I didn't mention it . thank you for your explanation and analysis.
@@GhostOnTheHalfShell In a normal 60 litre tank is the same amount of energy as my total electrical energy for 3.2 months in a sub tropical place over summer with the air con going 24-7. A huge amount of energy in each tank gets lost as heat, 70% for diesel and 75% for petrol and it takes 15% of the energy in oil to refine it into it's different products. If someone uses a tank a week for a year that is equal to 17 years of my total electrical energy so can you prove " It's like burning up several tanks of gasoline to buy bubblegum."? It costs 4 cents per hundred dollars to create fiat, if it costs more or if we went back to a gold standard then money can't be printed on a whim, the consumption of oil happens now because of money, reduce that amount then consumption reduces. If we see money as a ticket to energy then are you comparing the amount of overall energy emitted in the two different systems or just the initial input because it sounds like initial input. If overall the amount of energy able to be emitted is less because bitcoin has a constraint then bitcoin would be the better option. We need a constraint and need a means of exchange/account just for basics to be given to people for free, food, shelter and medical are the low hanging fruit of this world, limiting consumption can't happen when banks jobs are to get as much debt into the system as possible.
Bitcoin is a bubble, once it becomes valuable enough people will sell them for "fiat" then it's value will go into a downward spiral, the people who have the most bitcoin are just waiting to see when it's value peaks
Not true. There are many people who try to short Bitcoin, sure... They are not wise. Many people will never sell their Bitcoin. You can borrow against it like a house.
not sure bitcoin can be compared to money as a store of value, its like saying horse manure is a store of value as long as some one will pay the same price for it as when you bought it.
Jason can you give an opinion of Nate Hagens work on climate policy, energy, and economics of climate change I think you have a lot in common with Nate ( Nate Hagens podcast UA-cam) it’s really nice to see more podcasts from you.
Question? Will the influx of freshwater from Greenland reverse if the AMOC shuts down which would allow the AMOC to recover and would this just keep cycling.
It's possible the Amoc shut down is the trigger for ice ages but the only way this happens is if the ice melts and freshwater enters the system, with a warming planet due in the next few decades it would be difficult to see the Amoc recover in our lifetimes, it will be more like 2000 years of melt happening.
The most important factor is people‘s mindset towards global environment.
If it continues to be consumerist it won‘t matter what money system you have. If fiat money serves consumerism they will opt for it instead of bitcoin. Only if people understand and accept our interconnections with and dependence on the web of life and the modest lifestyle this requires will there be a chance of survival.
So mind decides, not money.
if returning to the gold standard was possible it would perhaps help rein in some of the GHG growth and consumption but it would not rein in GHG emissions enough.
There was inflation before the hard money standard was suspended in 1971. In Germany we had galloping inflation during the early 1920s.
This guy puts it better ua-cam.com/video/aNPuGIX1xmY/v-deo.htmlsi=Qpj2STEWCgo0WAB8
I'm intrigued to see where Jason's thought process goes on this subject. In the meantime:
1) Isn't Ethereum a similar crypto to BitCoin? Are there any other similar crypto's to Bitcoin? Excuse my ignorance of crypto's. I wonder what the comparative energy needs are of Gold v Credit/Debt v Crypto
2) My gut feeling is that it isn't a good thing for our energy needs to keep increasing as Jason suggests. We're struggling to make any headway to diminish the use of fossil fuels. Increased energy consumption will make this main objective harder. More so when our limited timeframe is factored in. But Jason's end goal is spot on. We need to elevate those in poverty. Redistributing the hoarded wealth of our billionaire and multi-millionaire class seems like a better approach.
3) I'm struggling to make the connection between crypto and less war. The penny still hasn't dropped about how this dynamic works.
He has a video on how Bitcoin disincentivizes war. Ethereum and any other crypto cannot be compared to Bitcoin. It's the only fixed supply asset in the world. More finite than gold.
Interesting take on bitcoin!
Won't bitcoin require continuous, long term uninterrupted universal digital (internet?) access at all times and locations to be useful? Not sure I would bet on that happening based on climate/biodiversity trends.
Would people in remote areas need to resort to barter, assuming fiat money eventually disappears?
Can we be sure there will be a maximum amount, or could some other entity start a parallel to bitcoin in the future?
great questions, I also wonder about the energy cost of mining unique numbers that are attached to Bitcoin
We have to compare what the cost of bitcoin is environmentally against fiat currency that doesn't have any constraints and the consumptive power the amount of money able to generated means. If we went back to gold there would be less money around so less consumption of goods, same with bitcoin that has power constraints and ATM's/paywave etc are connected to the net, if it was bitcoin instead would anybody care.
Vast energy and WATER squandered in the Arizona desert to power ACRES of computers, let alone the minerals required to make the compute.
@@earthsystem Vast, squandered, what are you comparing this against? Not using a computer?
@@antonyjh1234 deficit spending and borrowing and printing money and inflation to allow or cover this never seemed wise to me, because it means spending more than one actually has, so it uses up and discourages savings. Why would anyone especially a state want to end up as a net borrower? Its a system designed for bankers and lenders and against the People.
In the fiat currency world it’s incorrect to think of a deficit as an obligation to be paid off. The United States, quite a few other countries issues, and spends in its own currency. The government is the producer of money that does not create in the obligation to pay it off because in fact, the national debt is our money supply.. let me repeat this. There is a distinction for currency sovereign, and that they can issue money without obligation to any other entity to pay it off. Quite literally this is the act provisioning money to an economy means of exchange to an economy. The great problem of the third world is that they aren't in a position to really issue currency they can buy things internationally so when they take out debt in dollars they are subject to exchange rates and us interest rates. Bitcoin is under the control of billionaires. They own most of the asset. Bitcoin is exchanging access to finance from a government to billionaires.
This is one of the things I try to explain to people that in this debt based system, all money is someone's debt, whether central or commercial bank, all money is just bank debt and loans paid back make money disappear, just like taxes but where I disagree is the third world.
As all money is debt and must be paid back, they aren't able to get into debt if they are going to default or if it can't be taxed out. For money to flow through society it must be able to come out again and the third world where banking might be some gold chains or cash under the mattress then it can't, the issue with third world people is they aren't able to get into debt because of the risk.
@@antonyjh1234
the "hiddenCost" of BTC is the POWER consumed to maintain itself. In other words there is a "Debt Obligation" paid in Kilowatts.
Without that POWER it doesn't exist.
@@antonyjh1234 central bank money is not debt, not for currency sovereign. Because the currency sovereign is the originator of money from nothing. Commercial money differs from fiat currency in that it’s comes with a debt obligation. It has to be paid back, but even beyond that payment of principal is the interest charge. Depending on the duration and interest rate applied a borrower can be paying back 2, 3 maybe r times money that they borrowed. This is the case with the 30 year mortgage by the way it’s like 70% of the the money that a borrower forks over to the bank over 30 years. For nations borrow in dollars not in their currency, they are just as bad for the same circumstance as somebody who borrows money or mortgage.
Dollar dominance is a problem. But one thing is very clear is the world and especially the third world developing world whatever the euphemism is these days I prefer the word global periphery in no way shape or form wants to become debt slaves to people like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. That’s another level of unmitigated evil that no one should be forced to become subject to.
But my main point will be this you don’t need interest and you don’t need inflation to keep money in circulation and to prevent deflationary spirals. Is a thing called Freigeld, which is really a set of principles that should govern the monetary system. The most important element of it is to put a time limit on the store of value of money. People who hang onto money that hoard it, becomes subject to taxation. The word for this is demurrage, a term that originated in the shipping industry to prevent captains from leaving their vessels at dock overly long.
Bitcoin is not under the control of billionaires. Most of it belongs to regular people. It is not easily manipulated. Also, debt is not a good thing. You wrote a lot of words for saying, "I don't understand Bitcoin." Study harder.
@@meretekotyk636 Going around spamming the same message of saying nothing helps nobody and sets your goals further back if understanding is your goal.
Bitcoin seems like the last thing you or any environmental scientist would advocate for.
IKR? Mass bitcoin generator arrays turning energy into “compute” but… JB been consistent on this, friend
This chap has lost the plot.
Yeah what the hell 😅
Not really, he's saying making it harder to get money means less consumption which is logical enough, it might mean more emissions per dollar but because fiat money costs so little, I think around four cents per hundred dollars to create, then something harder to get will increase the value of the currency, it will be a way to reduce the amount of currency and if you compare the emissions or producing bitcoin to trillions of dollars issued to the world then bitcoin would be a the smaller emission value. Considering it costs banks around 40k per million issued do you think less emissions generating the money means less emissions with the millions issued? If we went back to a gold standard or hard money based on something, it could be the carbon value of a product, that doesn't change then money doesn't need to change its value, it fiat money produced just on the ability to take it out again has no constraints then why is fait money a better choice, environmentally to you?
@ read John Maynard Kane’s The Theory Of… that should lift the scales from your eyes
Bitcone can not exist without electricity. Any conservation in that?
What, next will you be selling an investment course in bitcoin? Crypto currency still requires fossil fuel energy to be generated. Maybe someday it won't. Tell us when and if that will be soon enough to offset global warming, and I'll be a bit more interested. Just saying that bitcoin is the future seems a bit shallow.
He's talking about money and how all money is bank debt, this money is issued at a very low cost and all money is a ticket to energy, so why is it not a valid thing to say if we cut down the amount of money in society then it will reduce overall energy consumption, because of the scarcity?
I would say you are one of the masses that don't understand money is just bank debt, a bank, whether central or commercial wants as much of this debt into society as they can, central banks want the loans paid back so we have taxes, commercial banks want loans paid back so we have repayments, but their job is to get as much of it as they can into society, when it costs four cents per hundred dollars to create debt/money then he is saying having less of that ability is a good thing, how is that shallow?
What might be shallow is as money is debt and we need to hold debt to live then will bitcoin be like this also and if that is the case then nothing has changed, better to give people food, shelter and medical for free then.
@@antonyjh1234 Having passed the NASD Series 3 license requirements and a futures advisor, I have some understanding of money. Getting away from fiat currency would be great, but then what? Crypto? Perhaps, but would governments, the World Bank and Central Banks agree to get on board. Unlikely. What I see Mr. Box trying to say that the overall energy expenditure (in terms of greenhouse gas emissions) built in today's money system could be lessened with a block-chain verified method of energy (work for money) exchange. So the question for Mr. Box is how and when will the crossover happen and will it be in time to reap any benefit from this form of currency production and exchange to offset global warming? Personally, I don't see that happening in time, but maybe. Perhaps Musk will convince dumbbell Trump to convert the $ to Doge, which would most likely collapse the world monetary system. Meanwhile the global temp keeps rising year after year as do GH gasses.
I agree -- Bitcoin is SQUANDERING ENERGY using vast compute to make more Bitcoin. In the deserts of Arizona a huge amount of energy AND WATER powers the search for more Bitcoin.
@@earthsystem What should the energy be used for? You use these data centres by using your computer or phone, Ai is supposed to use more than data centres, will you refuse to use ai?
I’m sharing some insight. This guy puts it better ua-cam.com/video/aNPuGIX1xmY/v-deo.htmlsi=Qpj2STEWCgo0WAB8
Thanks for doing this work! 😊 The normies will come around, eventually. They will see how many problems Bitcoin solves one day. It gives me hope for a better world too.
Thunder bay Canada ,..historically a bitterly cold place, almost 2C at 7:00 am,...its happening friend.
BitCoin represents a logarithmic increase in ENERGY consumption as it linearly increases in VALUE.
I'm not so sure, it is the panacea we might think. Where ENERGY consumption is compared,.. its rival is Ai,..at this point in TIME one controls the other.
Given an amount of TIME, ...these roles will switch.
Given Mankinds history,...one will be secreted and destroyed.
One thing is for certain, burning Oil is the root cause..
The ability of fiat money that costs so little to create, means we have a greater access to energy, the increase in consumption of energy to create bitcoin could have a reduction in overall consumption.
It costs 4 cents per hundred dollars to create fiat, if it costs more or if we went back to a gold standard then money can't be printed on a whim, the consumption of oil happens now because of money, reduce the amount then consumption reduces.
@@antonyjh1234
im not disagreeing, but there are many interconnections to Money, Oil, Ai, BitCoin, and of course Geo-politics , Power and Control. I think its fairly reasonable to include pride, prejudice and sheer folly to the mix as well,
One thing is for certain about BTC tho,..it consumes Vast Quantities of POWER for transactions as well as its own sustenance in that it is never STATIC, whereas,...Gold is just a lump
@@-LightningRod- " One thing is for certain about BTC tho,..it consumes Vast Quantities of POWER for transactions as well as its own sustenance in that it is never STATIC, whereas,...Gold is just a lump"
I disagree you should set the bar of what is certain or not. Vast, compared to the amount of energy consumed with money, what are you comparing it against?
While gold may be a lump it requires oil in vast amounts in the form of diesel, in a normal 60 litre tank is the same amount of energy as my total electrical energy for 3.2 months in a sub tropical place over summer with the air con going 24-7. A huge amount of energy in each tank gets lost as heat, 70% for diesel and 75% for petrol and it takes 15% of the energy in oil to refine it into it's different products. If someone uses a tank a week for a year that is equal to 17 years of my total electrical energy, so gold is not emission free but could easily be seen as the more polluting.
@@antonyjh1234
Well,...as i posted in the earlier Post,...there are many inter-connections in that Money is not an island, nor is BTC, Gold or anything else for that matter, ...nothing ONLY exists in a vacuum.
BTC is relatively easy to Quantify in that it takes POWER to TRANSACT. It will take a Logarithmic amount of POWER as its VALUE increases linearly, In short,...as the VALUE of BTC grows its DEMAND for POWER increase EXPONENTIALLY ,
Inevitably A.i. and BTC will become entwined. I believe that the POWER demands o0f these two similar yet different technologies is, ...uncharted.
How much energy does cryptocurrency require again?
Bitcoin not crypto is the first important distinction. Have a listen to this This guy puts it better ua-cam.com/video/aNPuGIX1xmY/v-deo.htmlsi=Qpj2STEWCgo0WAB8
In just a few years Ai will completely undermine any formulaic value of bitcoin.
I understand your words are constituting or containing a set form of words but I do not understand what you mean, are you able to explain in plain speak how ai will do this?
one will definitely control the other
Exactly Paul. Quantum computing will upset the compute-limited value of Bitcoin
@@earthsystem we are many years away from that ever happening. Bank accounts are at risk of being hacked before Bitcoin will be, as it's an easier target.
This was one your most concise videos/lectures I've listened to. Also thank you for pointing out the original move from the gold standard was an international action not just and american one.
Unfortunately, Jason Box is very badly informed about the nature of monetary systems. The cryptocurrency ultimately finds its origin in billionaires. They have constructed an asset system that they control. They own the majority of bitcoin. Ultimately they control access to financing through it. On top of this on the energy cost of processing a transaction in bitcoin is insane. It's like burning up several tanks of gasoline to buy bubblegum.
Inflation and interest rates by the way are two sides of the same economic power relation. Our monetary policies inject 2% inflation, intentionally into an economy as a measure to prevent deflationary spirals. But this inflation is not necessary at all, and neither is an interest rate to motivate commerce. Both are only wealth transfer from the poor to the rich.
@@GhostOnTheHalfShell I wasn;t sure of the energy cost connected to bitcoin just thought it was high, so I didn't mention it . thank you for your explanation and analysis.
@@GhostOnTheHalfShell In a normal 60 litre tank is the same amount of energy as my total electrical energy for 3.2 months in a sub tropical place over summer with the air con going 24-7. A huge amount of energy in each tank gets lost as heat, 70% for diesel and 75% for petrol and it takes 15% of the energy in oil to refine it into it's different products. If someone uses a tank a week for a year that is equal to 17 years of my total electrical energy so can you prove " It's like burning up several tanks of gasoline to buy bubblegum."?
It costs 4 cents per hundred dollars to create fiat, if it costs more or if we went back to a gold standard then money can't be printed on a whim, the consumption of oil happens now because of money, reduce that amount then consumption reduces. If we see money as a ticket to energy then are you comparing the amount of overall energy emitted in the two different systems or just the initial input because it sounds like initial input. If overall the amount of energy able to be emitted is less because bitcoin has a constraint then bitcoin would be the better option.
We need a constraint and need a means of exchange/account just for basics to be given to people for free, food, shelter and medical are the low hanging fruit of this world, limiting consumption can't happen when banks jobs are to get as much debt into the system as possible.
@@stevethomas7146 I think he is looking at the energy scenario incorrectly.
Bitcoin is a bubble, once it becomes valuable enough people will sell them for "fiat" then it's value will go into a downward spiral, the people who have the most bitcoin are just waiting to see when it's value peaks
Not true. There are many people who try to short Bitcoin, sure... They are not wise. Many people will never sell their Bitcoin. You can borrow against it like a house.
Nope
This guy puts it better ua-cam.com/video/aNPuGIX1xmY/v-deo.htmlsi=Qpj2STEWCgo0WAB8
There will have to be an inflation rate on bitcoin, power, maintenance etc
Not how the protocol is designed. Study bitcoin
@@JasonBoxClimate If the energy to power bitcoin has a cost then how will that cost not be put onto bitcoin? Do you understand bitcoin?
not sure bitcoin can be compared to money as a store of value, its like saying horse manure is a store of value as long as some one will pay the same price for it as when you bought it.
The feds reacted to the mortgage crisis by creating a trillion or so $s to buy empty houses.
Where is my comment? Did Google or you delete it? Srsly?
Jason can you give an opinion of Nate Hagens work on climate policy, energy, and economics of climate change I think you have a lot in common with Nate ( Nate Hagens podcast UA-cam) it’s really nice to see more podcasts from you.
Odd to intrude in somebody's research work to ask them to interpret a science interpreter.
Question? Will the influx of freshwater from Greenland reverse if the AMOC shuts down which would allow the AMOC to recover and would this just keep cycling.
It's possible the Amoc shut down is the trigger for ice ages but the only way this happens is if the ice melts and freshwater enters the system, with a warming planet due in the next few decades it would be difficult to see the Amoc recover in our lifetimes, it will be more like 2000 years of melt happening.
Awful
You seem from the future 😂
He is! This was filmed on 29 December.