Skip to main content

Those who think that Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies are better than money, understand nothing about this trade-based society. Currencies only represent trades, and trade is what pushes people to create so much destruction in the world. Also, to "mine" cryptocurrencies and spend so much energy doing that, more than countries of hundreds of millions of people, is simply insane. What these "miners" do is "solving" irrelevant mathematical problems to see what computer is first to get some rewards for that. Just to create more currency and "distribute" it in a very unequal manner to those who have the most powerful computers.

TROM cuts through this shit like a hot knife through butter, because TROM focuses on "trade as the origin of most problems", and not money.


2 people reshared this

I think most people are leaning towards crypto currencies because of privacy reasons, and I get that. But I'm disappointed to see no one talking about its environmental effects.

I like everything to be as resource efficient as it gets, its almost like an obsession for me. And there's nothing that hurts me more than seeing humans waste their energy like this.

Imagine humans becoming a type 1 civilization & using that energy for mining crypto currencies, things that have no physical value.

Rokosun reshared this.

The truth is, it's not private... you need sms verification to even purchase from atms where i'm from. Add to that, the fact that you are now relying on exchanges, see bank, who you have to trust... then when lights go out you lose everything.

Rokosun reshared this.

Yeah, even though many of these things are private in theory, it doesn't mean it'll be like that in practice. Overall, I think making a currency private is easier said than done.

I'm always is support of privacy and decentralization. But when it comes to crypto currencies, I just don't think its worth the effort. We're getting privacy at the expense of these environmental issues, and that too is only private in theory. Clearly, the consequences outweigh the benifits here.

Rokosun reshared this.

But I'd say the most destructive power is the incentive behind a currency. The incentive is always to trade, and eventually trade means waste, climate change, slavery, corruption, and a ton of issues as we detailed in so many books. I'd say, so what if a currency is private and very serves the same purpose of trading. How is that better? :)
This is what I initially said, most people are moving to crypto currencies for privacy reasons. They're not trying to remove the incentive behind currency or its destructive power. Maybe they don't understand the problem like we do, or maybe they don't care.

Either way, I wanted to speak from their perspective. Even though we say trade is the cause of most problems, we're not even close to ending trade. For now, I think its good to talk about environmental issues & reduce harm
I think you are overly-complicating things. :P - My definition of trade is quite easy to grasp I'd say, as explained above. We also have a book explaining the "birth of trade" - see it here - and another one all about trade, here ;)

I appreciate your engagement, but I think you re taking the definition of trade to the stars and back, and that's not what we are talking about. :)
Thanks for taking a look at our books. But always keep in mind that if you want to put the microscope on any word, it will quickly lose any sense of reality. This is why we need context. And our context seems very simple: trade is the exchange of goods/services. Like we see today in so many different forms. I explained a lot in the comment section here and a lot more in the books mentioned. If you want, we could have a live discussion about "what is trade" in a special tromcast. If you can join and would want to do that let us know and we can schedule one. To have a friendly discussion about this notion. Could be useful for others to participate too and/or to listen.
I guess I'd specify that all it takes for crypto is a reset/glitch .. the paper money will still hold it's value for a little while, until there's no toilet paper, then it will be more valuable;)
Yes, all currency (or most) creation is based on some sort of energy use. But the idiocracy of such cryptocurrencies is that they rely entirely on that. Since they rely on computer power. Plus, they are seen as a "new" thing that is different from money. How is it different from money?
But one may argue the gov doesn't really control money at all. Big corporations do. They buy and sell, and own and employ, a lot more than any gov. Plus, companies and rich people lobby gov so much it has become a ridiculous show. So the laws you see in regards to money (and not only) + the flow of money, influence, power and the value of money, is almost entirely (if not entirely) driven by the big money players. Isn't it? And the same happens with bitcoin or pretty much any other currency, where big players control the game.