4 ms·

I don't think you realize the scale of it. Bitcoin is primarily used for speculation, the value is only based on more and more people buying in, and the energy

I don't think you realize the scale of it. Bitcoin is primarily used for speculation, the value is only based on more and more people buying in, and the energy usage is overwhelming. We are in dire need of reducing overall energy usage, but Bitcoin works against this in a huge way. And even if the energy comes from "sustainable sources", solar cells still need to be manufactured, the hardware that does nothing but mine and ends up as e-waste needs to be produced. The environmental impact doesn't end with energy usage. Overall, Bitcoin has an overall negative impact on society and environment, none of the claims that proponents made really hold up. There are many fundamental flaws that prevent Bitcoin from functioning as a practical currency, even is energy use wasn't an issue.

gowld 6y ago
> overall negative impact on society and environment is the description of almost everything in the developed world lifestyle, from animal meat to automobiles to overlarge houses.
- karpour 6y ago
  Oh, so then it's ok to have a "currency" where one transaction uses 650kWh, 12000000 times more than a credit card transaction. I get all the benefits of crypto, but there are also massive downsides, the biggest being the energy/hardware usage, which has to rise constantly by design.
  - DennisP 6y ago
    That's only a downside for proof-of-work cryptocurrencies. Proof-of-stake eliminates almost all the energy consumption.
    - karpour 6y ago
      I'd be excited about a widely adopted cryptocurrency that doesn't gobble up insane amounts of energy and needs an ever increasing amount of computing power to keep it from collapsing, but right now Bitcoin is using almost as much energy as Sweden, which isn't great.
      - DennisP 6y ago
        I agree, and sadly they're unlikely to change. However, Ethereum has about as much usage (though lower market cap), has proof-of-stake running with 100K nodes and $5 billion staked, and plans to migrate the rest of the network and eliminate mining within a year or so.
me_me_me 6y ago
there are people who are sending their ashes to space. And nobody care, just like nobody cars about btc being utility less. There are countless bigger issues that HN doesn't talk about can we add btc's env impact to it?!

gowld 6y ago

> overall negative impact on society and environment is the description of almost everything in the developed world lifestyle, from animal meat to automobiles to overlarge houses.

karpour 6y ago
Oh, so then it's ok to have a "currency" where one transaction uses 650kWh, 12000000 times more than a credit card transaction. I get all the benefits of crypto, but there are also massive downsides, the biggest being the energy/hardware usage, which has to rise constantly by design.
- DennisP 6y ago
  That's only a downside for proof-of-work cryptocurrencies. Proof-of-stake eliminates almost all the energy consumption.
  - karpour 6y ago
    I'd be excited about a widely adopted cryptocurrency that doesn't gobble up insane amounts of energy and needs an ever increasing amount of computing power to keep it from collapsing, but right now Bitcoin is using almost as much energy as Sweden, which isn't great.
    - DennisP 6y ago
      I agree, and sadly they're unlikely to change. However, Ethereum has about as much usage (though lower market cap), has proof-of-stake running with 100K nodes and $5 billion staked, and plans to migrate the rest of the network and eliminate mining within a year or so.

me_me_me 6y ago

there are people who are sending their ashes to space. And nobody care, just like nobody cars about btc being utility less. There are countless bigger issues that HN doesn't talk about can we add btc's env impact to it?!