8 ms·

This meme needs to die. Keeping the lights on tens of thousands of banks and keeping hundred of thousands of servers running transaction processing cost a lot o

This meme needs to die. Keeping the lights on tens of thousands of banks and keeping hundred of thousands of servers running transaction processing cost a lot of electricity too. Efforts are underway to get rid of dirty energy because the costs of renewable and battery storage are so much cheaper that this is a non-issue.

harryh 9y ago
Efforts are underway to get rid of dirty energy because the costs of renewable and battery storage are so much cheaper that this is a non-issue. Um what? Certainly we have made great progress as a civilization switching to cleaner forms of energy production but calling greenhouse pollution a "non issue" at this point is pretty nuts!
- Frogolocalypse 9y ago
  Install clean energy sources then. Charge for it, I don't care. Don't blame bitcoin because of cheap energy.
spookthesunset 9y ago
Give me a fucking break. The "traditional financial world" processes tens if not hundreds of thousands of transactions per second worldwide. Bitcoin processes no more than 4 per second. On a per-transaction basis, you could be insane to argue that Bitcoin is anything other than an environmental disaster. Worse, Bitcoin's energy consumption scales based on the price of bitcoin, not on transaction volume. The more USD each bitcoin is worth, the more miners will spend on energy to get that sweet, sweet block reward. So it isn't a "meme" and Bitcoin's proponents would do well to concede that "yeah, bitcoin pisses away a lot of electricity--sorry about that...".
- Frogolocalypse 9y ago
  Supply and demand. If you want mining to reduce emissions, increase the cost of energy. Bitcoin will remain unaffected. Don't blame bitcoin because of the cost of energy. Blame the energy producers for selling it to miners at that price.
  - dsacco 9y ago
    Why not blame both?
    - Frogolocalypse 9y ago
      Because one is to blame and the other is not.
      - dsacco 9y ago
        That's tautological. Implicit in the question is a request for an explanation of why both are not to blame. If you don't believe Bitcoin has an enabling or encouraging effect on activity that is bad for the environment, why is that? Why is it more appropriate to shift blame entirely on the energy provider instead of the very energy inefficient process? Do you also suppose that we should reduce vehicle emissions by increasing the cost of gasoline? Why isn't it fair to blame vehicles that run on gasoline and vehicles which are particularly inefficient at running on gasoline?
        Frogolocalypse 9y ago
        > That's tautological. No it's not. I'm saying you can fix the problem by modifying one constraint. Fix the cost of energy, and you fix your problem with energy wastage. It will make absolutely zero difference to bitcoin what the price of energy is. If energy is more expensive, mining will reduce, and bitcoin difficulty resets to the lower mining hashrate. > Do you also suppose that we should reduce vehicle emissions by increasing the cost of gasoline? Of course. It's ludicrous to think otherwise.
        spookthesunset 9y ago
        What a cop out. So we have to increase energy prices so a bunch of greedy scammers can waste energy speculating on hot air? Again. Give me a break...
        9y ago
- kindfellow92 9y ago
  This is just your bias disguised as virtue. Bitcoin is a blip compared to everything that “wastes” energy. By the way there is no such thing as a waste of energy. This isn’t soviet Russia, neither you nor the government dictate how one is allowed to use energy. As long as you have the funds to pay for it, you are free to use the electricity how you see fit. If you’re reasonably concerned about the environmental concerns of how energy is produced, take it up with the producers. Stop technology-shaming.
- rlpb 9y ago
  > Worse, Bitcoin's energy consumption scales based on the price of bitcoin, not on transaction volume. The more USD each bitcoin is worth, the more miners will spend on energy to get that sweet, sweet block reward. Until Bitcoin is done bootstrapping and the block reward is zero.
scottnyc 9y ago
This meme needs to die. You think if bitcoin became a transaction standard there wouldn't be thousands of institutions and companies servicing the use of bitcoin? You don't think Coinbase won't become just like JPMorgan and employ 100k people to provide customer service? Just look at all the startups and people currently employed to figure out blockchain today. So take your assumption of all of modern-day finances's electricity demands and add that to the infinite loop of energy that is required to keep your bitcoins in existence whether you transact or not.
asciimo 9y ago
And all the armored trucks, the parking meters, the security staff and equipment, the phone calls, the faxes, the mailed documents...

harryh 9y ago

Efforts are underway to get rid of dirty energy because the costs of renewable and battery storage are so much cheaper that this is a non-issue. Um what? Certainly we have made great progress as a civilization switching to cleaner forms of energy production but calling greenhouse pollution a "non issue" at this point is pretty nuts!

Frogolocalypse 9y ago
Install clean energy sources then. Charge for it, I don't care. Don't blame bitcoin because of cheap energy.

spookthesunset 9y ago

Give me a fucking break. The "traditional financial world" processes tens if not hundreds of thousands of transactions per second worldwide. Bitcoin processes no more than 4 per second. On a per-transaction basis, you could be insane to argue that Bitcoin is anything other than an environmental disaster. Worse, Bitcoin's energy consumption scales based on the price of bitcoin, not on transaction volume. The more USD each bitcoin is worth, the more miners will spend on energy to get that sweet, sweet block reward. So it isn't a "meme" and Bitcoin's proponents would do well to concede that "yeah, bitcoin pisses away a lot of electricity--sorry about that...".

Frogolocalypse 9y ago
Supply and demand. If you want mining to reduce emissions, increase the cost of energy. Bitcoin will remain unaffected. Don't blame bitcoin because of the cost of energy. Blame the energy producers for selling it to miners at that price.
- dsacco 9y ago
  Why not blame both?
  - Frogolocalypse 9y ago
    Because one is to blame and the other is not.
    - dsacco 9y ago
      That's tautological. Implicit in the question is a request for an explanation of why both are not to blame. If you don't believe Bitcoin has an enabling or encouraging effect on activity that is bad for the environment, why is that? Why is it more appropriate to shift blame entirely on the energy provider instead of the very energy inefficient process? Do you also suppose that we should reduce vehicle emissions by increasing the cost of gasoline? Why isn't it fair to blame vehicles that run on gasoline and vehicles which are particularly inefficient at running on gasoline?
      - Frogolocalypse 9y ago
        > That's tautological. No it's not. I'm saying you can fix the problem by modifying one constraint. Fix the cost of energy, and you fix your problem with energy wastage. It will make absolutely zero difference to bitcoin what the price of energy is. If energy is more expensive, mining will reduce, and bitcoin difficulty resets to the lower mining hashrate. > Do you also suppose that we should reduce vehicle emissions by increasing the cost of gasoline? Of course. It's ludicrous to think otherwise.
        spookthesunset 9y ago
        What a cop out. So we have to increase energy prices so a bunch of greedy scammers can waste energy speculating on hot air? Again. Give me a break...
        9y ago
kindfellow92 9y ago
This is just your bias disguised as virtue. Bitcoin is a blip compared to everything that “wastes” energy. By the way there is no such thing as a waste of energy. This isn’t soviet Russia, neither you nor the government dictate how one is allowed to use energy. As long as you have the funds to pay for it, you are free to use the electricity how you see fit. If you’re reasonably concerned about the environmental concerns of how energy is produced, take it up with the producers. Stop technology-shaming.
rlpb 9y ago
> Worse, Bitcoin's energy consumption scales based on the price of bitcoin, not on transaction volume. The more USD each bitcoin is worth, the more miners will spend on energy to get that sweet, sweet block reward. Until Bitcoin is done bootstrapping and the block reward is zero.

scottnyc 9y ago

This meme needs to die. You think if bitcoin became a transaction standard there wouldn't be thousands of institutions and companies servicing the use of bitcoin? You don't think Coinbase won't become just like JPMorgan and employ 100k people to provide customer service? Just look at all the startups and people currently employed to figure out blockchain today. So take your assumption of all of modern-day finances's electricity demands and add that to the infinite loop of energy that is required to keep your bitcoins in existence whether you transact or not.

asciimo 9y ago

And all the armored trucks, the parking meters, the security staff and equipment, the phone calls, the faxes, the mailed documents...