An Essay On Bitcoin's Faultfindes And Their Flawed Arguments
Reading about Bitcoin in most websites might make you think it is some kind of scam that is on the verge of collapsing. Most of the articles written about it on many websites are totally misleading. They portray Bitcoin as a pyramid scheme that is mysterious and complicated. Of course none of that has any truth in it. Bitcoin's decentralized public ledger enables individuals to have total control over their assets, in a way that was unheard of prior to its invention. So why do we see so many articles online vilipending it? To answer that question we would have to understand the human nature. Humans are naturally opposed to any change. This characteristic is usually beneficial to the prosperity of humans but sometimes we have to acknowledge that a change for the better is necessary. In the case of fiat money this tendency of humans to resist change shows itself in an extreme way. Although most people are intelligent enough to understand that trustless mechanisms are inherently better than those that require trust, it is difficult for many to act accordingly. Most people would be open to using Bitcoin when it is so popular that it is no longer unfamiliar. However, while it is still new and unknown to many, they don't trust it.
There are many publications that focuse on disparaging Bitcoin as if Bitcoin was an intelligent entity actively trying to defraud people. Bitcoin cannot be stopped simply because some authors don't like it. It is unreasonable to criticize a network that is supported by so many smart people all over the world. The critics of Bitcoin are often those who know the least about it. They research it for a while, fail to understand it, get annoyed and write a long critical article about it caviling Bitcoin's various aspects. Their objections to Bitcoin are often so frivolous that you might find yourself at a loss trying to respond to them. Some of these objections are as follows:
Bitcoin uses too much electricity.
Bitcoin's price is volatile.
Bitcoin is not paper money. (lol)
Let's go through these yeasty objections one by one to see if we can respond to them in a way that makes sense. (of course we can)
So the first objection raised by the critics is that the Bitcoin network consumes too much electricity. It is often asserted that the fact that Bitcoin mining consumes lots of power means that it contributes to global warming.
Well, I must admit that at first sight this objection seems to be valid. Of course global warming is very important and we should all try to do our best to mitigate it. While we agree with that statement completely we find ourselves at a loss trying to figure out the logic behind some of the other assertions of these same critics. For instance, electric vehicles are often proposed as the solution to global warming. We know that electric vehicles, like the Bitcoin network, use a lot of electricity. Then how is this possible that electric vehicles are good for the environment and Bitcoin is bad for it? Of course that logic makes no sense, especially when we consider that Bitcoin mining plants can easily be built where clean sources of energy are located. By being in the close proximity to the clean sources of electricity Bitcoin mining companies can buy the excess amount of electricity that is generated but has no other demand. This is just one obvious solution to the much talked-about issue of Bitcoin's high energy consumption. Let's move on to the next objection.
Another thing that the critics tend to castigate Bitcoin for is its fluctuating price. A stable price, they argue, is the most important characteristic of a unit of value. To this we can respond with just one sentence: it is still too early for Bitcoin to have a stable price. That having been said, the laws of supply and demand are crucial to understanding how Bitcoin's price is determined. No single entity decides how much one bitcoin should be worth. This is not a weakness of Bitcoin but arguably one of the most important components of its philosophy. The only way for a currency to be totally stable is for it to be controlled by a central entity. This need for trust is what Bitcoin got rid of by introducing its decentralized Blockchain.
The next objection to Bitcoin is probably not often plainly expressed by the critics but if you read their articles carefully you will not fail to understand that that is what they usually boil down to. Bitcoin is not paper money. The fact is that people have gotten used to paper money because they have been using it for so long. As I said earlier in this article humans are naturally opposed to change. This makes us see Bitcoin as something unfamiliar that we can't understand as easily as we would understand the concept of paper money. If Bitcoin reaches its potential it might be possible to represent Bitcoin in paper form but we are a long way from that.
While most coverage of Bitcoin is nonspecific publications tends to be derogatory it is easy to see through their bias. Bitcoin's invention changed the whole concept of money so drastically that it is difficult for a lot of people to wrap their heads around it. At the end of the day, though, a thoughtful study of the criticism which Bitcoin receives should make it clear that the critics don't have much of an argument against it.
I am not a financial advisor. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are not sound investments. This article was written for entertainment purposes only and should not be considered as endorsement of any coin. Do your own research before investing in anything. Only You are responsible for your decisions.