Crypto still feels very dot com - I'm sure it will implode in dramatic fashion at some point, though I also suspect there is the odd Amazon tucked among the pet.coms. I can see the value of some of the projects in terms of distributed architecture for various things like finance, even automotive, but that still doesn't really make a case for the tokens themselves - they are just tokens (with the possible exception of BTC) and the only reason to buy is the belief there is a greater fool out there somewhere. However for myself, who has never been a betting person, it's like a slow motion horse race and entertaining enough. Marginally cooler than bingo....
I have no Ontology, not even in BCI25, so most certainly not an attempt to pump, but their website gives an insight into how blockchain may actually have real world uses: https://ont.io/
Indeed apart from Bitcoin, most other projects in the space are filled with scammers or companies selling Fool's Gold.
As for the "authorities", they are well aware that their monetary intervention is distorting markets. However they have pushed themselves into a corner. Of all the "tools" to battle their way out of it, inflation appears to be the path of least resistance.
But BTC can handle around 5 transactions per second, whereas Visa alone is nearer 2,000 (I assume Mastercard is similar). Not a very fair comparison.
Not a fair comparison at all. Comparing Bitcoin to Visa is like comparing the US Dollar to Barclays. Its Apples to Oranges.
Bitcoin (the Asset and the Network) does not compete with Visa. Bitcoin is a full stack end to end financial system, not a common retail payment system. The Bitcoin network is a settlement layer. Settlement systems exhibit fewer but larger transactions. On-chain, It is not uncommon to see single transactions of over a billion dollars/pounds. Payment systems like Visa or Paypal do the opposite. They exhibit many more transactions but of smaller size.
Technology in the real world occurs with design Tradeoffs. In the case of Bitcoin there is a Tradeoff between transactions per second and the guarantee or finality of settlement. Not just that but Bitcoin also sacrifices number of transactions per second for overall Network security and for its "unconfiscatabality". Bitcoin owners welcome these tradeoffs as protection for large stores of wealth. If multiple transactions are required, the Bitcoin Mainchain may defer to second layer solutions such as Lightning, Liquid, or companies such as Square (cashapp), Visa and Paypal who may absorb the credit risk. This is analogous to the way it works with Fiat.
None, and I never will for environmental reasons.
Energy discussions in Bitcoin, are simply energy discussions of the Human Race. If you fix the energy problem of the human race you fix the energy problem of bitcoin.
The focus on Bitcoin is moot as it consumes more renewable
energy in percentage terms than almost any other large scale industry or country in the world. Therefore, it could be argued that is more Eco-friendly.
Perhaps Bitcoin is the path to the solution. Objectively, if one is genuinely interested in the environment, the less efficient Petrodollar Fiat system should be abandoned for a cleaner Bitcoin Solution.
Any discussion on energy usually descends into one group of people hating on things they do not understand or like, while ignoring the energy use of things that they do understand and like. This is done usually from the comfort of their well heated homes and oversized cars, in clothes cleaned by washing machines and driers while typing or speaking on energy-using phones/computers or televisions. Hypocritical perhaps?
Truth is that the energy use of the Human Race will expand and grow as the Human Race grows and thrives.
For environmental reasons and some context, consider this statistic: a single Extinction Rebellion protester emits more CO2 in one day than the entire Global Bitcoin Network since inception.