Bitcoin is commonly known to those with more than a cursory knowledge of it to be a horribly inefficient product. Indeed, its very premise is to use large amounts of energy computing pointless math problems to prevent fraud without having a trusted agent verifying transactions. Yet, if you search about it's energy consumption compared to that of traditional banking, you'll just find tons of copy-and-pasted fluff pieces about how Bitcoin only uses half of much energy as traditional banking. Is this true? How can this be?
Bitcoin Energy Consumption vs Banking Efficiency
April 28, 2022Deprecated: Parsedown::blockSetextHeader(): Implicitly marking parameter $Block as nullable is deprecated, the explicit nullable type must be used instead in /home/public/blog/grav-admin/vendor/erusev/parsedown/Parsedown.php on line 715
Deprecated: Parsedown::blockTable(): Implicitly marking parameter $Block as nullable is deprecated, the explicit nullable type must be used instead in /home/public/blog/grav-admin/vendor/erusev/parsedown/Parsedown.php on line 853
Response to Horowitz: 15 Studies Do Not Indicate Immunity from Prior Infection Is More Robust than from the Covid Vaccines
September 01, 2021In an article for TheBlaze, Daniel Horowitz claimed on August 25, 2021 that 15 studies indicated that surviving COVID-19 provides better immunity than getting vaccinated does. CDC studies have already directly proven the opposite, but I thought it would be good to still fact-check this claim to show how it's a lie.
It should be noted that the author, Daniel Horowitz, is not an immunologist. Much like me, he is a lawyer. However, I apparently have better readi...