5 ms·

Plattsburgh, New York has imposed an 18-month moratorium on Bitcoin mining

54 points by artsandsci 9y ago

douglasfshearer 9y ago
If it's just Bitcoin named in the bylaw, what's to stop the mining enterprises from switching to mining another cryptocurrency?
- paulcole 9y ago
  https://www.cityofplattsburgh-ny.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=229 https://www.cityofplattsburgh-ny.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=22... The law itself says, “cryptocurrency”: >A LOCAL LAW IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON COMMERCIAL CRYPTOCURRENCY MINING OPERATIONS IN THE CITY OF PLATTSBURGH
  - douglasfshearer 9y ago
    Thanks.
sp332 9y ago
The city is Plattsburg, NY. It's an 18-month moratorium on new commercial miners.
bobthepanda 9y ago
How many people does a commercial crypto mining operation even employ? Sounds like a lot of negatives for the locals without a lot of upside.
coding123 9y ago
So the truth is that people are using electric heaters instead of gas/oil based heating systems, and they are somehow blaming it on bitcoin mining? Also shouldn't the law be written to specify any electricity usage over a certain wattage? I don't know anything about Plattsburg, NY but why would a local factory that uses 100 megawatts be more "allowed" to use electricity than a bitcoin miner? What if the bitcoin miner (or any high-wattage business) sets up their own 1 MW solar array? If the city has power deals that is bad for itself, why punish its residents with a law like this?
- sirclueless 9y ago
  It sounds like a bandaid to paper over a poorly-conceived program of incentives while they work out something more permanent. They were using their power plant as a loss-leader to attract industry. Which explains why the local factory is "more allowed;" it's presumably because they expect the factory to generate more jobs and tax revenue than the bitcoin miner.
- overcast 9y ago
  No one in Plattsburgh, NY is setting up a solar array. It's winter for 9 months of the year.
- ballenf 9y ago
  Instead of a flat cap, a MWH per employee would likely align best with the city's stated goals.
- dwighttk 9y ago
  >So the truth is that people are using electric heaters instead of gas/oil based heating systems, and they are somehow blaming it on bitcoin mining? what? >What if the bitcoin miner (or any high-wattage business) sets up their own 1 MW solar array? Why would a business that moved to (or set up in) Plattsburg to take advantage of the 2¢/KWh rate build any sort of energy production?
ct0 9y ago
Would it be okay to train extensive neural nets?
brettatoms 9y ago
I wish we could avoid the click-baity titles and replace "This City" with "Plattsburgh, New York"
freehunter 9y ago
After reading the article, I'm going to have to agree with the city. I would strongly encourage anyone who disagrees to read the article as well. They're not banning bitcoin mining, they're exempting commercial bitcoin miners from a cut-rate electricity deal designed to draw in industrial operations like factories. Basically the city gives extremely cheap power to factories and other industrial enterprises in exchange for them hiring employees and generating revenue for the city. This was written overly broad, miners moved in and took advantage of it, and now the city is realizing their mistake and temporarily changing the wording of the law while they determine how to fix it long-term. Existing operations are not impacted, just new ones. I think the disagreement here is the headline is just super shitty. They didn't ban bitcoin mining, they stopped subsidizing extremely cheap electricity for commercial bitcoin mining operations. Big difference.
unethical_ban 9y ago
>Plattsburgh, New York Just Took Eliminated Cut-Rate Electrity Rates For Commercial Cyryptocurrency Miners
- dwighttk 9y ago
  for New commercial cryptocurrency miners
rory096 9y ago
Recent coverage of bitcoin mining in Plattsburgh: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/business/economy/bitcoin-electricity-productivity.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/business/economy/bitcoin-... Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16498776 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16498776 Gives you a sense of what the mayor was thinking in the weeks leading up to this. (And makes you wonder if the NY Times reporter's prodding is what got them around to actually banning it.)
philipodonnell 9y ago
Can we get a headline update on this? Its not a ban, its not the first time a city has temporarily refused to issue new cryptocurrency mining permits, its not on Bitcoin specifically and the city is Plattsburg, NY. Every word in this headline is misleading or wrong except the word 'passed'. Better headline is right from the same article: 'Plattsburgh, New York has imposed an 18-month moratorium on Bitcoin mining to prevent miners from using all the city’s cheap electricity.' The city couldn't supply enough electricity at a certain type of discounted rate so they will refuse any new permits for any cryptocurrency mining operations until they find an approach that works without driving electricity prices up during periods of high demand. There have been temporarily restricted new permits in the NW for some time now as new substations were being brought online.
- dang 9y ago
  Let's try the subtitle instead.
  - philipodonnell 9y ago
    Thanks!
bonoetmalo 9y ago
How are they going to go about enforcing something like this?
- bentruyman 9y ago
  Read the article.
yason 9y ago
I can understand the case but this is just littered with perverse governance all over. I didn't know there would be places where you could be assumed to request a mining permit? What's it to anyone else what you're doing with your computers? And why would you even tell anyone? I wonder if the mining permit applies even if you have your own solar farm to run your machines? If not, then why call it a mining permit and not "permission to buy huge amounts of electricity"? But also electricity should be neutral just as internet should be net-neutral. It should be so that you buy electricity and then do whatever you want with it. If this causes problems it's more than fair for the city or the power company to charge progressively as a function of usage until it doesn't make any economic sense to buy more. If each 10kWh costs more than the previous 10kWh it will set some natural limits and if someone still wants that electricity badly they would be paying enough so that the power company can buy that expensive power from other networks. It seems to me that a lot of problems were solved backwards there.

54 points by artsandsci 9y ago

If it's just Bitcoin named in the bylaw, what's to stop the mining enterprises from switching to mining another cryptocurrency?

paulcole 9y ago
https://www.cityofplattsburgh-ny.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=229 https://www.cityofplattsburgh-ny.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=22... The law itself says, “cryptocurrency”: >A LOCAL LAW IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON COMMERCIAL CRYPTOCURRENCY MINING OPERATIONS IN THE CITY OF PLATTSBURGH
- douglasfshearer 9y ago
  Thanks.

sp332 9y ago

The city is Plattsburg, NY. It's an 18-month moratorium on new commercial miners.

bobthepanda 9y ago

How many people does a commercial crypto mining operation even employ? Sounds like a lot of negatives for the locals without a lot of upside.

coding123 9y ago

So the truth is that people are using electric heaters instead of gas/oil based heating systems, and they are somehow blaming it on bitcoin mining? Also shouldn't the law be written to specify any electricity usage over a certain wattage? I don't know anything about Plattsburg, NY but why would a local factory that uses 100 megawatts be more "allowed" to use electricity than a bitcoin miner? What if the bitcoin miner (or any high-wattage business) sets up their own 1 MW solar array? If the city has power deals that is bad for itself, why punish its residents with a law like this?

sirclueless 9y ago
It sounds like a bandaid to paper over a poorly-conceived program of incentives while they work out something more permanent. They were using their power plant as a loss-leader to attract industry. Which explains why the local factory is "more allowed;" it's presumably because they expect the factory to generate more jobs and tax revenue than the bitcoin miner.
overcast 9y ago
No one in Plattsburgh, NY is setting up a solar array. It's winter for 9 months of the year.
ballenf 9y ago
Instead of a flat cap, a MWH per employee would likely align best with the city's stated goals.
dwighttk 9y ago
>So the truth is that people are using electric heaters instead of gas/oil based heating systems, and they are somehow blaming it on bitcoin mining? what? >What if the bitcoin miner (or any high-wattage business) sets up their own 1 MW solar array? Why would a business that moved to (or set up in) Plattsburg to take advantage of the 2¢/KWh rate build any sort of energy production?

ct0 9y ago

Would it be okay to train extensive neural nets?

brettatoms 9y ago

I wish we could avoid the click-baity titles and replace "This City" with "Plattsburgh, New York"

freehunter 9y ago

After reading the article, I'm going to have to agree with the city. I would strongly encourage anyone who disagrees to read the article as well. They're not banning bitcoin mining, they're exempting commercial bitcoin miners from a cut-rate electricity deal designed to draw in industrial operations like factories. Basically the city gives extremely cheap power to factories and other industrial enterprises in exchange for them hiring employees and generating revenue for the city. This was written overly broad, miners moved in and took advantage of it, and now the city is realizing their mistake and temporarily changing the wording of the law while they determine how to fix it long-term. Existing operations are not impacted, just new ones. I think the disagreement here is the headline is just super shitty. They didn't ban bitcoin mining, they stopped subsidizing extremely cheap electricity for commercial bitcoin mining operations. Big difference.

unethical_ban 9y ago

>Plattsburgh, New York Just Took Eliminated Cut-Rate Electrity Rates For Commercial Cyryptocurrency Miners

dwighttk 9y ago
for New commercial cryptocurrency miners

rory096 9y ago

Recent coverage of bitcoin mining in Plattsburgh: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/business/economy/bitcoin-electricity-productivity.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/business/economy/bitcoin-... Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16498776 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16498776 Gives you a sense of what the mayor was thinking in the weeks leading up to this. (And makes you wonder if the NY Times reporter's prodding is what got them around to actually banning it.)

philipodonnell 9y ago

Can we get a headline update on this? Its not a ban, its not the first time a city has temporarily refused to issue new cryptocurrency mining permits, its not on Bitcoin specifically and the city is Plattsburg, NY. Every word in this headline is misleading or wrong except the word 'passed'. Better headline is right from the same article: 'Plattsburgh, New York has imposed an 18-month moratorium on Bitcoin mining to prevent miners from using all the city’s cheap electricity.' The city couldn't supply enough electricity at a certain type of discounted rate so they will refuse any new permits for any cryptocurrency mining operations until they find an approach that works without driving electricity prices up during periods of high demand. There have been temporarily restricted new permits in the NW for some time now as new substations were being brought online.

dang 9y ago
Let's try the subtitle instead.
- philipodonnell 9y ago
  Thanks!

bonoetmalo 9y ago

How are they going to go about enforcing something like this?

bentruyman 9y ago
Read the article.

yason 9y ago

I can understand the case but this is just littered with perverse governance all over. I didn't know there would be places where you could be assumed to request a mining permit? What's it to anyone else what you're doing with your computers? And why would you even tell anyone? I wonder if the mining permit applies even if you have your own solar farm to run your machines? If not, then why call it a mining permit and not "permission to buy huge amounts of electricity"? But also electricity should be neutral just as internet should be net-neutral. It should be so that you buy electricity and then do whatever you want with it. If this causes problems it's more than fair for the city or the power company to charge progressively as a function of usage until it doesn't make any economic sense to buy more. If each 10kWh costs more than the previous 10kWh it will set some natural limits and if someone still wants that electricity badly they would be paying enough so that the power company can buy that expensive power from other networks. It seems to me that a lot of problems were solved backwards there.