> Neither can cement, cars, porcelain, or most other products of heavy industry.
These are resources. The more we have of them, the more we can do. BTC does not operate this way. If 100BTC exists and if 100,000,000 BTC exists the network functions in the same manner.
> I'm not sure what kind of future you're imagining here. Are you thinking that maybe Algeria will monopolize world bitcoin mining because it has 0.1% more sunlight than Chile and Saudi Arabia, so its mining costs will be 0.05% lower? That seems unlikely to me.
I'm hoping to imagine a future where no nation uses a considerable amount of carbon to generate energy. The claim is that BTC adoption moves us in this direction (though this is later dropped).
> Now, there are some places where coal power generating capacity is increasing. PRC built 38.4 GW of new coal power capacity last year. But it also built 48.2 GW of new solar capacity and 71.7 GW of new wind capacity.
Given that China is one of the regions you mention earlier where glorious cheap renewables are dominating, I think this is a pretty darn important fact. Any increase in carbon use is terrible. We need it to go to nearly zero.
There is still the undressed assumption that deploying more solar lowers the cost but that the same effect is impossible with carbon.
These are resources. The more we have of them, the more we can do. BTC does not operate this way. If 100BTC exists and if 100,000,000 BTC exists the network functions in the same manner.
> I'm not sure what kind of future you're imagining here. Are you thinking that maybe Algeria will monopolize world bitcoin mining because it has 0.1% more sunlight than Chile and Saudi Arabia, so its mining costs will be 0.05% lower? That seems unlikely to me.
I'm hoping to imagine a future where no nation uses a considerable amount of carbon to generate energy. The claim is that BTC adoption moves us in this direction (though this is later dropped).
> Now, there are some places where coal power generating capacity is increasing. PRC built 38.4 GW of new coal power capacity last year. But it also built 48.2 GW of new solar capacity and 71.7 GW of new wind capacity.
Given that China is one of the regions you mention earlier where glorious cheap renewables are dominating, I think this is a pretty darn important fact. Any increase in carbon use is terrible. We need it to go to nearly zero.
There is still the undressed assumption that deploying more solar lowers the cost but that the same effect is impossible with carbon.
> However, I am done explaining things to you.
I'll wait for 1002 I guess.