• capital@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    That is the opposite of apples to apples.

    Per capita measurements exist for a reason.

    • Null User Object@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Per what capita? There’s only one global banking system on Earth. That’s what makes it global. There’s only one Bitcoin blockchain, and it’s globally accessible. Trying to subdivide either into arbitrary regions based on geographic or geopolitical borders is meaningless.

      • capital@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        How about per ‘people who are actually going to use this shit for day-to-day spending’?

        I just got my mom using a password manager and still have to remote in to help her from time to time. And you wanna get her to move to digital cash that, once stolen, is unrecoverable?

        Get real.

        • Null User Object@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          That’s a strong argument against password managers. We probably shouldn’t allow them, since some people are going to find them difficult to use.

          ETA: Doubling the number of people using Bitcoin (especially on layer 2 protocols), is not going to remotely double it’s energy usage.