5 ms·

City Passes the First Bitcoin Mining Ban in the US

16 points by dsr12 9y ago

adrianmonk 9y ago
At first I was going to ask why the city was sticking its nose in people's private business and why they care what they're using that electricity for. But it seems that they aren't doing it for that reason, and residents are being pretty severely negatively affected. On a side note, the city's goal was to use cheap electricity to lure industry to town, and their policy did exactly what they tried to. Seems like they didn't exactly plan out what would happen if they succeeded.
- Scoundreller 9y ago
  Quebec has done the same thing with cheap hydroelectric and aluminum production. Instead of selling th energy for a pretty penny to the NE USA, they sell it below-market to preserve a small number of jobs in the industry since it’s highly automated. $300 000 to preserve each job per year https://www.iedm.org/3341--300-000-per-job-each-year-for-35-years-subsidies-for-aluminum-producers-benefits-that-dont-add-up https://www.iedm.org/3341--300-000-per-job-each-year-for-35-...
- crazygringo 9y ago
  > and their policy did exactly what they tried to. In a way. Obviously their goal was growth: to attract industry whose wages and hopefully some profits would go back into the local economy. That's not going to happen with Bitcoin mining. If 200 local jobs had been created, then the story would be different.
  - adrianmonk 9y ago
    They were probably looking for a specific type of growth (one that includes jobs) but failed to specify. Oops, but lesson learned. But there's also a second issue: even if the bitcoin operation had brought jobs, it still used enough power to raise everyone's electric bills by $100-200 a month. That's huge, and it's not obvious that it's even worth it. Of course, you can argue that if a business had high labor costs, it never would have expanded as much as or as quickly as the bitcoin mining businesses did.
bighi 9y ago
I just hope they start banning it everywhere. And follow through with enforcing it.
- GCU-Empiricist 9y ago
  "Must be a yearning deep in human heart to stop other people from doing as they please. Rules, laws--always for the other fellow. A murky part of us, something we had before we came down out of the trees, and failed to shuck when we stood up. Because not one of those people said: 'Please pass this so I won't be able to do something I know I should stop.' Nyet, tovarishchee, was always something they hated to see their neighbors doing. Stop them 'for their own good'--not because the speaker claimed to be harmed by it." Manuel Davis O'Kelley The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
  - bighi 9y ago
    > Must be a yearning deep in human heart to stop other people from doing as they please When they harm others, then yes. It's the same reason why we ban theft, murder, etc.
- milesvp 9y ago
  While they're at it they should ban tvs and computer video. video games are definitely a no-no too. They all waste so much electricity! /s Do not presume to dictate what others do. If there really are negative externalities set regulation to price those externalities in. At worst create step functions in pricing to discourage behaviors above some typical threshold. But outright banning something that others find utility in just because reasons is a dangerous game.
  - euisKwieoIw28 9y ago
    Reality is under no obligation to abide every fetishists particular emotional capture Society is expected to build more to satisfy every unique experience that requires complex efforts? Laughable.
  - itsok_itsnotok 9y ago
bcheung 9y ago
Just change the price of electricity or make it tiered. Problem solved. Making a law seems overkill and a bit draconian. What business is it of the government what you do with your computer if you aren't doing anything malicious or immoral? Ensuring a blockchain stays secure and updates faster is a legitimate service.

16 points by dsr12 9y ago

At first I was going to ask why the city was sticking its nose in people's private business and why they care what they're using that electricity for. But it seems that they aren't doing it for that reason, and residents are being pretty severely negatively affected. On a side note, the city's goal was to use cheap electricity to lure industry to town, and their policy did exactly what they tried to. Seems like they didn't exactly plan out what would happen if they succeeded.

Scoundreller 9y ago
Quebec has done the same thing with cheap hydroelectric and aluminum production. Instead of selling th energy for a pretty penny to the NE USA, they sell it below-market to preserve a small number of jobs in the industry since it’s highly automated. $300 000 to preserve each job per year https://www.iedm.org/3341--300-000-per-job-each-year-for-35-years-subsidies-for-aluminum-producers-benefits-that-dont-add-up https://www.iedm.org/3341--300-000-per-job-each-year-for-35-...
crazygringo 9y ago
> and their policy did exactly what they tried to. In a way. Obviously their goal was growth: to attract industry whose wages and hopefully some profits would go back into the local economy. That's not going to happen with Bitcoin mining. If 200 local jobs had been created, then the story would be different.
- adrianmonk 9y ago
  They were probably looking for a specific type of growth (one that includes jobs) but failed to specify. Oops, but lesson learned. But there's also a second issue: even if the bitcoin operation had brought jobs, it still used enough power to raise everyone's electric bills by $100-200 a month. That's huge, and it's not obvious that it's even worth it. Of course, you can argue that if a business had high labor costs, it never would have expanded as much as or as quickly as the bitcoin mining businesses did.

bighi 9y ago

I just hope they start banning it everywhere. And follow through with enforcing it.

GCU-Empiricist 9y ago
"Must be a yearning deep in human heart to stop other people from doing as they please. Rules, laws--always for the other fellow. A murky part of us, something we had before we came down out of the trees, and failed to shuck when we stood up. Because not one of those people said: 'Please pass this so I won't be able to do something I know I should stop.' Nyet, tovarishchee, was always something they hated to see their neighbors doing. Stop them 'for their own good'--not because the speaker claimed to be harmed by it." Manuel Davis O'Kelley The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
- bighi 9y ago
  > Must be a yearning deep in human heart to stop other people from doing as they please When they harm others, then yes. It's the same reason why we ban theft, murder, etc.
milesvp 9y ago
While they're at it they should ban tvs and computer video. video games are definitely a no-no too. They all waste so much electricity! /s Do not presume to dictate what others do. If there really are negative externalities set regulation to price those externalities in. At worst create step functions in pricing to discourage behaviors above some typical threshold. But outright banning something that others find utility in just because reasons is a dangerous game.
- euisKwieoIw28 9y ago
  Reality is under no obligation to abide every fetishists particular emotional capture Society is expected to build more to satisfy every unique experience that requires complex efforts? Laughable.
- itsok_itsnotok 9y ago

bcheung 9y ago

Just change the price of electricity or make it tiered. Problem solved. Making a law seems overkill and a bit draconian. What business is it of the government what you do with your computer if you aren't doing anything malicious or immoral? Ensuring a blockchain stays secure and updates faster is a legitimate service.