It's simple: People don't have a problem with folding because has an altruistic objective. It actually does something (or at the very least, intends to). Mining is strictly selfish. No, I wouldn't say the same thing, for the reason I just mentioned. Take supercomputers owned by corporations and schools for example - they are FAR more power-hungry than what any miner is going to build, but I have no problem with them, because they're doing something useful. That doesn't mean I agree with what they're calculating, but it isn't just arbitrary number crunching. People tend to use Bitcoin as a catch-all for cryptocurrency. From what I hear, Ethereum is what GPU buyers are the most interested in. Bitcoin, to my knowledge, never caused any market problems for PCs because everyone just used ASIC miners, which were more cost and energy effective. But Ethereum [for now] is more efficient with GPUs. It's wrong because it's selfish and wasteful. You are consuming a lot of power, contributing toward NOTHING at all, while maybe gaining money out of it. Remember, people who partake in this are gambling the value of the currency they are mining for. There's no promise that you'll even keep what you "earned". For the time being, the value is good. I find that very hard to believe. I don't think Bitcoin mining is anywhere near as profitable as you think it is if you think getting a couple ASICs is enough to live off of. If you live in the US, chances are, your power bill is not going to be lower than $0.10KW/h. If you're consuming just 2KW per month (including other personal electronics, appliances, air conditioning, etc) then you are not going to reliably survive on mining: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...ty-consumption-ethereum-energy-climate-change Like stated before: Ethereum mining. I could argue your mindset is wrong. This is a scary amount of energy and hardware being made for a specific purpose which does nothing and will always do nothing. When a company makes a failed product, they don't usually get far enough to create a concerning amount of waste (of either manpower, energy, or physical resources). Worst-case scenario, it becomes an example of what not to do, and for us to learn from. You're comparing the evolution of technology to something that has no intrinsic value at all... The inverse of your comparison can also be said: Look at all the hugely popular pitches on Kickstarter or Indie GoGo that became a major disappointment or never came to fruition. You can also consider products and fads that were super popular or practical that we look back on like "wow, that seemed horrible" or "why did people like this?". And I'm not just referring to things that were obsoleted. For example: Pogs, Pokemon Go, or Vine. Anyway, go ahead and justify these "career" choices all you want - I'm not going to stop you/them. But, there is not any amount of evidence you can provide that will convince me that there is nothing wrong with mining.