It does, indirectly. If you are able to mine a lot of bitcoin you will also have access to a lot of real money, as you need that for "efficiently" mining them using cheap (often subsidized fossil) energy. The mining capacities grant power over the network. So it is an inverted cause and effect relation.
We are really confused by your stance. The basic problem of PoW based blockchain applications is the 51% attack, which basically says: as soon as you have enough mining power you can control it. Of course this is not end of story, but the basic problem is there. Our point however was the inverse perspective: if you are rich you get more bitcoin and bitcoin will not solve any social or ecological problems. It is still unclear how much it will increase severity of specific problems.
@BUNDjugend_ak_digi @mark This is patently wrong, and works exactly the opposite way to fiat money. where asset holders have profited from massive inflation, while poorer people lose purchasing power every day.
A bitcoin miner doesn't automatically earn more money from the coins they mined. They have to re-invest exactly the same amount of computing capacity, time, and electricity as any other miner competing with them, for every single block they try to mine.
Yes you do. If you have more computing power and cheaper electricity you will get more bitcoin/real money and as you can optimize this ratio, if you already have a lot of money and or power you will be able to get more bitcoin at a better ratio, than "poor" people. It is a vehicle for the rich to get richer.
Welcome to this official Fediverse instance for climate justice groups.
There is also: climatejustice.social also for individual activists