4 ms·

Wasting drinkable water to run a generation plant seems particularly immoral. Why not buy a fish tank and see what you can keep alive?

JoeAltmaier 6y ago
That's true of all bitcoin power sources though. Its all trading Earth's resources for imaginary points. Only a human could conceive such a thing was desirable.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  There’s a matter of degree. The water plant is using electricity to hoist the water, so it’s strictly worse to use the water as a source than to use electricity directly. Add to that that we as a species are running out of drinkable water (there’s a good documentary about this on Netflix) and you have an inarguably unethical activity.
  - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
    Oh no question. It was the idea of 'bitcoin' I find appalling.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    I think it's unethical to use shared resources for personal gain. If you are using substantially more "free" water to make money, that seems to be an abuse of the system and you are making money at the tax payer expense. Using drinkable water for other activities may not be a "an inarguably unethical activity" by itself. There are areas where water scarcity is not an issue and there may not be any demand for export from those areas.
- runjake 6y ago
  Whenever I hear this argument, I wonder what the power consumption is for keeping fiat currency going.
  - muzani 6y ago
    Printing it costs energy. Storing it and transporting it costs energy. It seems similar to the argument that trucks create greenhouse gases, neglecting that horses were much worse.
    - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
      That's the 'ol false dichotomy. Sure we can have digital currency (in fact, the dollar is mostly digital already). We just don't have to burn 2% of the American energy budget calculating it via insanely expensive ways, when traditional methods can 'do digital' without that.
    - ironmagma 6y ago
      It seems quite likely though that we have way more trucks now than there ever were horses. Additionally, biological chemical reactions are typically much more efficient and precise than manmade ones.
      - muzani 6y ago
        https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great-Horse-Manure-Crisis-of-1894/ https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great... "This problem came to a head when in 1894, The Times newspaper predicted… “In 50 years, every street in London will be buried under nine feet of manure.”" There's an xkcd joke that when a lot of people work really hard to solve a problem, people will assume it was never a problem in the first place. It's not just greenhouse gases, but... other forms of pollution as well. Not to mention horse carcasses - at least cars can get stripped down and recycled. I don't think trucks are anywhere near this bad.
        ironmagma 6y ago
        It's apples and oranges. Comparing the carbon emissions of a truck, as well as the significant airborne particles from the road being torn up by said truck[1] to a biological entity, probably producing more methane than CO or CO2. I recall hearing that weight's effect on a road's wear and tear is polynomial rather than linear, so trucks almost certainly lead to more air pollution than horses ever did. There are also a multitude of incredibly hazardous ingredients in tires, something that horses never had. [2] [1] https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2017/06/22/murphys-law-how-trucks-destroy-our-roads/ https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2017/06/22/murphys-law-how-trucks... [2] https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/artificial-turf-debate/rubber-mulch-safe-surface-your-childs-playground-n258586 https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/artificial-turf-debate/rub...

JoeAltmaier 6y ago

That's true of all bitcoin power sources though. Its all trading Earth's resources for imaginary points. Only a human could conceive such a thing was desirable.

ironmagma 6y ago
There’s a matter of degree. The water plant is using electricity to hoist the water, so it’s strictly worse to use the water as a source than to use electricity directly. Add to that that we as a species are running out of drinkable water (there’s a good documentary about this on Netflix) and you have an inarguably unethical activity.
- JoeAltmaier 6y ago
  Oh no question. It was the idea of 'bitcoin' I find appalling.
- giantg2 6y ago
  I think it's unethical to use shared resources for personal gain. If you are using substantially more "free" water to make money, that seems to be an abuse of the system and you are making money at the tax payer expense. Using drinkable water for other activities may not be a "an inarguably unethical activity" by itself. There are areas where water scarcity is not an issue and there may not be any demand for export from those areas.
runjake 6y ago
Whenever I hear this argument, I wonder what the power consumption is for keeping fiat currency going.
- muzani 6y ago
  Printing it costs energy. Storing it and transporting it costs energy. It seems similar to the argument that trucks create greenhouse gases, neglecting that horses were much worse.
  - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
    That's the 'ol false dichotomy. Sure we can have digital currency (in fact, the dollar is mostly digital already). We just don't have to burn 2% of the American energy budget calculating it via insanely expensive ways, when traditional methods can 'do digital' without that.
  - ironmagma 6y ago
    It seems quite likely though that we have way more trucks now than there ever were horses. Additionally, biological chemical reactions are typically much more efficient and precise than manmade ones.
    - muzani 6y ago
      https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great-Horse-Manure-Crisis-of-1894/ https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great... "This problem came to a head when in 1894, The Times newspaper predicted… “In 50 years, every street in London will be buried under nine feet of manure.”" There's an xkcd joke that when a lot of people work really hard to solve a problem, people will assume it was never a problem in the first place. It's not just greenhouse gases, but... other forms of pollution as well. Not to mention horse carcasses - at least cars can get stripped down and recycled. I don't think trucks are anywhere near this bad.
      - ironmagma 6y ago
        It's apples and oranges. Comparing the carbon emissions of a truck, as well as the significant airborne particles from the road being torn up by said truck[1] to a biological entity, probably producing more methane than CO or CO2. I recall hearing that weight's effect on a road's wear and tear is polynomial rather than linear, so trucks almost certainly lead to more air pollution than horses ever did. There are also a multitude of incredibly hazardous ingredients in tires, something that horses never had. [2] [1] https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2017/06/22/murphys-law-how-trucks-destroy-our-roads/ https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2017/06/22/murphys-law-how-trucks... [2] https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/artificial-turf-debate/rubber-mulch-safe-surface-your-childs-playground-n258586 https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/artificial-turf-debate/rub...