BITCOIN AS A COMPONENT OF THE MONETARY SYSTEM: SOCIAL INTEGRATION, TECHNOLOGICAL DIFFUSION AND SOCIO-POLITICAL TRANSFORMATIONSThe aim of this article is a multifaceted analysis of Bitcoin as a component of the contemporary monetary system, identifying the processes of its socialization, technological diffusion, and the consequences of changes in the socio-political space. The author successively presents indicators of Bitcoinâs social and economic integration and the development of blockchain as a tool transforming trust, legitimization, and the structure of value circulation. Particular emphasis is placed on analyzing the process of blockchain technology diffusion and the social mechanisms of legitimizing new forms of value. The article concludes with the thesis that Bitcoin, transcending its financial function, has become a component of a broader civilizational shift â a harbinger of the transformation of the model of money, ownership, and sovereignty in the era of Web 3.0.
Kryptovalutor har under det senaste decenniet vuxit fram som en viktig del av det globala finansiella systemet. Samtidigt har debatten om deras miljöpÄverkan blivit allt mer intensiv, sÀrskilt med avseende pÄ den höga energianvÀndningen hos kryptovalutor baserade pÄ Proof of Work (PoW). I denna studie undersöks och analyseras skillnaderna i miljöpÄverkan mellan PoW och den alternativt utvecklade mekanismen Proof of Stake (PoS). Syftet Àr att visa hur PoS erbjuder en betydligt mer hÄllbar modell för framtida blockkedjebaserade system. Arbetet baseras pÄ en litteraturstudie av vetenskapliga kÀllor och innehÄller Àven en kÀnslighetsanalys för att bedöma robustheten i resultaten. Slutsatsen visar att PoS har en avsevÀrt lÀgre energiförbrukning och koldioxidpÄverkan, vilket gör den till ett attraktivt alternativ ur ett hÄllbarhetsperspektiv.
Nathaniel Popper leaves in DIGITAL GOLD the following passage. But the week in Austin could not help fueling suspicion that perhaps, as in the old way of doing things, the economic benefits of all the new technology were, at least so far, accruing only a small elite, while the 99 percent that Occupy Wall Street had worried about were left reading about it at home on Twitter. Bitcoin itself faced the same concerns. Years earlier, Bitcoin had promised that it would spread its benefits to all its users, but by 2014 large chunks of Bitcoin economy were owned by a few people who had been wealthy enough before Bitcoin came along to invest in this new system. Most of the new coins being released each day were collected by a few large mining syndicates. If this was the new world, it did not seem all that different from the old oneïŒat least not yet. This is reality of Bitcoin. It does not have stability of supply. It does not have ability of credit creation. It does not have stability of value. It does not have wide agreement as a means of settlements. It exposes itself to speculation. So in conclusion, Bitcoin could not be money at least in the near future.