4 ms·

It's for buying and selling carbon offsets. Which in the grand scheme of "crypto for X" is not bad, since it's at least a thing that's actually exchanged in an

by RickS 7y ago

It's for buying and selling carbon offsets. Which in the grand scheme of "crypto for X" is not bad, since it's at least a thing that's actually exchanged in an existing market. Farmers can sell their carbon credits to fund things that need to happen on their farm, to businesses that need to purchase carbon offsets because they're producing more than they should be. Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. But I think the article's flyby description gives the thing room to sound much sillier than it really is.

wlesieutre 7y ago
> Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. But I think the article's flyby description gives the thing room to sound much sillier than it really is. The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches, so of all the things to say “Do X with blockchain” about, “Reduce carbon emissions” is an odd choice. If it were me I’d think you’d want to put I extra effort to not have a blockchain based solution, but I have a feeling the idea cane about from “what can we do with a blockchain” rather than “what is the best solution to this problem?”
- eropple 7y ago
  So I am on record around here as kinda thinking that cryptocurrency people are worse than coal-rollers with the cavalier garbage they do to our planet, but it's worth pointing out that a "blockchain" need not do that--cryptocurrency needs to do that because it has to be "hard" to create some kind of phantom scarcity and therefore rarity and therefore perceived value for the Ponzi schemers at the top of them to sell to the next sucker in line. Blockchain multi-party verification can be fairly fast when you take out the grift. Well, that grift. The buzzword-solution-searching-for-a-problem grift, as you note, is still very much in play.
- zeroxfe 7y ago
  > The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches Not all blockchains are proof-of-work. Almost all modern implementations (particularly for federated blockchains like OPs) use more power-efficient consensus algorithms. (I don't have an opinion on whether blockchains are the best solution to their problem, but a decentralized marketplace for carbon offsets does sound compelling.)
  - wlesieutre 7y ago
    That's true. I did quickly skim their website, figuring if they were doing a particular efficient blockchain that it would be the kind of thing they'd want to brag about. Didn't see anything, but also didn't go digging into the whitepaper.
  - hencq 7y ago
    Why does the marketplace need to be decentralized? The NYSE is centralized, but that doesn't seem to inhibit trading. The EU has a carbon cap and trade system (ETS) and while there is a fair bit to criticize about it, I don't think its centralized nature is one.
    - pushtheenvelope 7y ago
      Your question is very valid and good. i think having it be decentralized is a good way to build trust and transparency. It also protects one against the marketplace-operator acting against the interests of or favoring any one party. Consider how Amazon now exploits its marketplace for its own benefit by analyzing which products are doing well and making their own versions of these products. So, there is potential for the marketplace-operator to become non-neutral. I'm not sure how the NYSE started, but i suspect there are financial regulations governing its operations. These regulations take time to get established, and so in new fields having a decentralized marketplace that can guarantee neutrality (collectively) of the operators feels worthwhile. Does that make sense? i'm kinda on the fence myself, and trying to present the argument in-favor.
      - skybrian 7y ago
        Okay, but you'd still have to compare it with the scheme used by certificate transparency, which also builds a public, verifiable log. I'd be pretty confident in an organization that does it that way.
      - blacksmith_tb 7y ago
        That seems reasonable, but in a decentralized market don't we lose the ability to halt trading[1]? 1: https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answerstradinghalthtm.html https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answerstradinghalthtm.html
Eric_WVGG 7y ago
I know a guy who runs something similar, a marketplace where people can buy syndication rights (say, you run a rural TV station and want to buy rights to broadcast _Saved By the Bell_ or something). The whole thing is based on blockchain. It's doing extremely well, contracts and negotiations that used to take weeks can now be done in seconds. There's no cryptocurrency angle, which I believe means that there's no gross energy expenditure, although I'm not an expert and never asked.
- gtirloni 7y ago
  I'm honestly curious if blockchain alone improved their process that much. Could it be they had crappy processes that got overhauled with the blockchain adoption?
  - mywittyname 7y ago
    This is probably the case. I'm betting the company built a marketplace that allows stations to purchase distribution rights directly for a fixed price, as opposed to needing to call some salesperson and deal with weeks of verbal negotiation.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      Those kind of systems have existed for awhile. Plenty of media is already licensed that way. No blockchain necessary.
- manigandham 7y ago
  How exactly does a blockchain help with those transactions?
  - village-idiot 7y ago
    Hype.
- pushtheenvelope 7y ago
  can you please share the name of this marketplace?
jiveturkey 7y ago
another useless use of 'crypto'. this is better handled with traditional government registration/notary/title that kind of thing. > Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. It is being done without crypto! The only value crypto brings is a way to advertise 'proof' of purchase of offsets to the public, IOW for marketing purposes.

by RickS 7y ago

wlesieutre 7y ago

> Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. But I think the article's flyby description gives the thing room to sound much sillier than it really is. The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches, so of all the things to say “Do X with blockchain” about, “Reduce carbon emissions” is an odd choice. If it were me I’d think you’d want to put I extra effort to not have a blockchain based solution, but I have a feeling the idea cane about from “what can we do with a blockchain” rather than “what is the best solution to this problem?”

eropple 7y ago
So I am on record around here as kinda thinking that cryptocurrency people are worse than coal-rollers with the cavalier garbage they do to our planet, but it's worth pointing out that a "blockchain" need not do that--cryptocurrency needs to do that because it has to be "hard" to create some kind of phantom scarcity and therefore rarity and therefore perceived value for the Ponzi schemers at the top of them to sell to the next sucker in line. Blockchain multi-party verification can be fairly fast when you take out the grift. Well, that grift. The buzzword-solution-searching-for-a-problem grift, as you note, is still very much in play.
zeroxfe 7y ago
> The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches Not all blockchains are proof-of-work. Almost all modern implementations (particularly for federated blockchains like OPs) use more power-efficient consensus algorithms. (I don't have an opinion on whether blockchains are the best solution to their problem, but a decentralized marketplace for carbon offsets does sound compelling.)
- wlesieutre 7y ago
  That's true. I did quickly skim their website, figuring if they were doing a particular efficient blockchain that it would be the kind of thing they'd want to brag about. Didn't see anything, but also didn't go digging into the whitepaper.
- hencq 7y ago
  Why does the marketplace need to be decentralized? The NYSE is centralized, but that doesn't seem to inhibit trading. The EU has a carbon cap and trade system (ETS) and while there is a fair bit to criticize about it, I don't think its centralized nature is one.
  - pushtheenvelope 7y ago
    Your question is very valid and good. i think having it be decentralized is a good way to build trust and transparency. It also protects one against the marketplace-operator acting against the interests of or favoring any one party. Consider how Amazon now exploits its marketplace for its own benefit by analyzing which products are doing well and making their own versions of these products. So, there is potential for the marketplace-operator to become non-neutral. I'm not sure how the NYSE started, but i suspect there are financial regulations governing its operations. These regulations take time to get established, and so in new fields having a decentralized marketplace that can guarantee neutrality (collectively) of the operators feels worthwhile. Does that make sense? i'm kinda on the fence myself, and trying to present the argument in-favor.
    - skybrian 7y ago
      Okay, but you'd still have to compare it with the scheme used by certificate transparency, which also builds a public, verifiable log. I'd be pretty confident in an organization that does it that way.
    - blacksmith_tb 7y ago
      That seems reasonable, but in a decentralized market don't we lose the ability to halt trading[1]? 1: https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answerstradinghalthtm.html https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answerstradinghalthtm.html

Eric_WVGG 7y ago

I know a guy who runs something similar, a marketplace where people can buy syndication rights (say, you run a rural TV station and want to buy rights to broadcast _Saved By the Bell_ or something). The whole thing is based on blockchain. It's doing extremely well, contracts and negotiations that used to take weeks can now be done in seconds. There's no cryptocurrency angle, which I believe means that there's no gross energy expenditure, although I'm not an expert and never asked.

gtirloni 7y ago
I'm honestly curious if blockchain alone improved their process that much. Could it be they had crappy processes that got overhauled with the blockchain adoption?
- mywittyname 7y ago
  This is probably the case. I'm betting the company built a marketplace that allows stations to purchase distribution rights directly for a fixed price, as opposed to needing to call some salesperson and deal with weeks of verbal negotiation.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Those kind of systems have existed for awhile. Plenty of media is already licensed that way. No blockchain necessary.
manigandham 7y ago
How exactly does a blockchain help with those transactions?
- village-idiot 7y ago
  Hype.
pushtheenvelope 7y ago
can you please share the name of this marketplace?

jiveturkey 7y ago

another useless use of 'crypto'. this is better handled with traditional government registration/notary/title that kind of thing. > Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. It is being done without crypto! The only value crypto brings is a way to advertise 'proof' of purchase of offsets to the public, IOW for marketing purposes.