Queen Taylor Called “Ugh, so he calls me up and he’s like ‘I still love youuu’, and I’m like ‘I just… I mean, this is exhausting, you know? Like, we are never getting back together. Like, ever.’” –Bitcoin philosopher Taylor Swift, (Bitcoin Magazine)
Some types of bitcoin FUD are not just wrong or outdated, but at this point pretty pathetic. Here is the Alphaville team at Financial Times who have hated bitcoin for longer than anyone cares keeping track:
This is clearly mad. If a price-insensitive buyer came waddling slowly down the road waving an open cheque book measured in the hundreds of billions, we imagine crypto price fireworks will be otherworldly. The mind further boggles at the macroeconomic and financial implications that such a move would unleash. It’s easy to see the lure of bitcoin. It has technological beauty, even if it’s an environmental disaster.
"environmental disaster" is hyperlinked to Cambridge's Centre for Alternative Finance's breakdown, where bitcoin constitute 0.19% of world electricity, or about this in comparison:
Scroll down a bit, and we see that Bitcoin mining has a lower carbon footprint than gold. Fair enough, these guys can claim that gold should go away too and we should just have pretty fiat (#749912) but if bitcoin's tracked environmental damage isn't even at gold's microscopic level, why trouble yourself?
The rest (more standard FUD) is not worth reading:
But unlike most assets, it has no cash flows, no direct physical property rights, and limited utility. It is a claim on nothing more than confidence. No matter. Financial value — to state the obvious — is plutocratically determined. A pledge from the very government from which the US dollar derives its value* to pump up bitcoin valuations with freshly minted dollars is something that we should take seriously.
You're not disingenuous or mistaken anymore. You're just ridiculous.
Piss off, peeps.