Elon Musk recently appeared on the podcast of Indian entrepreneur Nikhil Kamath and said something quite interesting when discussing the topic of currency—energy is the only hard currency in the universe.
He went on to explain that in the future, humanity's material needs will be greatly satisfied, and by that time, the concept of currency may no longer be a necessity, or even the entire concept may disappear. Based on this logic, he believes that the underlying logic of Bitcoin is very solid—after all, mining essentially consumes energy, and this POW mechanism, to some extent, directly ties energy to value.
However, to put it another way, the leap from "currency will disappear" to "Bitcoin logic is hard" is quite significant. If currency really becomes unnecessary, what will be left of Bitcoin? Perhaps what Old Ma wants to express is that during the evolution of currency, those assets that can be linked to real energy consumption will have more confidence.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
10 Likes
Reward
10
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
PoetryOnChain
· 12-03 16:45
I agree with the logic that energy is the real hard currency, but how does that jump to Bitcoin being valuable? Elon's train of thought is truly wild, haha.
View OriginalReply0
SchrodingerGas
· 12-01 07:48
Musk's logical flaw is incredible... I can buy the idea of energy as hard currency, but jumping directly from "the disappearance of currency" to "Bitcoin is the hardest" misses several steps in the reasoning. If currency is gone, what can the energy consumption of POW still back? Unless he means to say that energy itself is the ultimate unit of valuation, and Bitcoin is just a trap-like energy certificate... Maybe I'm overthinking it.
View OriginalReply0
MetaverseLandlady
· 12-01 07:45
Musk's logic is a bit extreme; I can accept energy as hard currency, but then he praises Bitcoin? What happened to the demise of currency?
Chilu Community
1 hour ago
Something's off; if currency is gone, what does Bitcoin eat? Isn't this contradictory, haha?
Chilu Community
58 minutes ago
Pow Mining = energy consumption; this binding is indeed harsh, but the premise is that humanity really doesn't need currency... Only then would energy itself be the hardest asset, right?
Chilu Community
45 minutes ago
Uh, I don't quite understand; it feels like Musk is saying Bitcoin is more resistant to inflation in the evolution of currency? Or does he really believe in energy assets?
Chilu Community
32 minutes ago
I can't hold it in anymore. First, he says currency will die, then he says the logic of Bitcoin is solid; this flip-flop is a classic "everything I say is right."
Chilu Community
28 minutes ago
Wait a minute, does this theory mean that PoW coins are more valuable than PoS? Because they consume real resources?
Chilu Community
19 minutes ago
Sounds quite metaphysical, but the bottom line is a single sentence—energy is king; everything else is虚, so holding coins is not as good as directly investing in power stocks.
Chilu Community
7 minutes ago
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainTherapist
· 12-01 07:37
I agree with the logic of energy hard currency, but if currency disappears, how can we still play with Bitcoin? Musk's thinking is indeed a bit jumpy.
View OriginalReply0
ThesisInvestor
· 12-01 07:36
The logic of energy as a hard currency sounds very appealing, but then turning around and saying Bitcoin is stable, there are some significant logical flaws in that.
If currency disappears, what will Bitcoin rely on?
It still has to continue to rely on Consensus.
Is Musk acting as a fixer for POW or does he genuinely have high hopes for it? It's unclear.
View OriginalReply0
SandwichTrader
· 12-01 07:33
I agree with the logic of energy as hard currency, but the contradictory statements he made really confused me.
POW Mining = energy consumption = value, that makes sense. But on the day that currency disappears, how will Bitcoin still be useful? Musk seems to want to say that BTC is essentially the digitalization of energy, which ultimately is still just him trying to fix his own Holdings.
---
I remember now, every time he goes on a podcast he has to find a new reason for Bitcoin, and this time he finally played the energy card, which is quite creative.
---
So by that logic, the future will still depend on whose energy costs are the lowest? The risks could be huge.
---
In any case, the equation that energy ≠ value doesn’t hold up in reality, unless energy really becomes explosively abundant to the low price.
---
Haha Musk is starting to get philosophical again, and the more I listen, the more it feels like he’s trying to find logical support for his crypto investments.
Elon Musk recently appeared on the podcast of Indian entrepreneur Nikhil Kamath and said something quite interesting when discussing the topic of currency—energy is the only hard currency in the universe.
He went on to explain that in the future, humanity's material needs will be greatly satisfied, and by that time, the concept of currency may no longer be a necessity, or even the entire concept may disappear. Based on this logic, he believes that the underlying logic of Bitcoin is very solid—after all, mining essentially consumes energy, and this POW mechanism, to some extent, directly ties energy to value.
However, to put it another way, the leap from "currency will disappear" to "Bitcoin logic is hard" is quite significant. If currency really becomes unnecessary, what will be left of Bitcoin? Perhaps what Old Ma wants to express is that during the evolution of currency, those assets that can be linked to real energy consumption will have more confidence.