Your analysis has one major flaw: It would only make sense if ice cream had as severe a climate impact as bitcoin. I have no reason to believe that it does.
You would have to find a list of things that people enjoy but don't bring societal benefit that add up to bitcoin's climate impact. I assume that list will then either:
• contain things that should actually be banned or
• add up to way more utility for way more people than bitcoin
You would have to find a list of things that people enjoy but don't bring societal benefit that add up to bitcoin's climate impact. I assume that list will then either:
• contain things that should actually be banned or
• add up to way more utility for way more people than bitcoin