5 ms·

people on HN like to whine about the environment. they love the statistic that bitcoin uses more energy than argentina. ask them 6 months ago (when bitcoin stil

people on HN like to whine about the environment. they love the statistic that bitcoin uses more energy than argentina. ask them 6 months ago (when bitcoin still used the same amount of energy as argentina) and they will tell you how much they love btc and decentralization.

whoknew1122 6y ago
It's almost as if people's thoughts can change and evolve. I honestly wonder when and how changing your mind became a bad thing. Show me someone whose thoughts or ideas don't evolve and I'll show you someone who's wasting their life.
- virtue3 6y ago
  I suspect a lot of people didn't realize how much power was being used for bitcoin. New information should ideally get people to re-evaluate their initial opinions about something (ideally).
  - cesarb 6y ago
    > I suspect a lot of people didn't realize how much power was being used for bitcoin. And another thing which changed is that, every time the price of Bitcoin increases, it can (and will) use more power (the amount of power a Bitcoin miner uses is limited by how much power it can buy with the mining rewards, because if it used more power than that, it would be mining at a loss). There's a lot of difference between when one Bitcoin was USD 1, when it was USD 4000, and now that it's over USD 50000. Someone who was OK with how much power the Bitcoin network used back when the per-block mining reward was around USD 50, might not be OK with how much power the Bitcoin network uses now that the per-block mining reward is over USD 325000.
- ravenstine 6y ago
  Could be that, and it can also be that people are capable of being massive hypocrites. Nobody who opposes Bitcoin on environmental grounds has anything to say about the sheer waste and pollution that most of us take part in. If Bitcoin is so bad for using as much energy as Argentina, then we should stop using energy to stream entertainment, which we are doing now more than ever.
  - whoknew1122 6y ago
    > "Nobody who opposes Bitcoin on environmental grounds has anything to say about the sheer waste and pollution that most of us take part in." [citation needed] > "If Bitcoin is so bad for using as much energy as Argentina, then we should stop using energy to stream entertainment, which we are doing now more than ever." Until we get off fossil-fuel based electricity, all environmental arguments are going to be based off marginal utility. There's a trade-off. I personally think that Bitcoin at best is an unregulated financial market and at worst fake internet money. The fact mining contributes to more energy consumption than entire countries is worrying to me. It's a problem that's only going to get worse. On the other hand, let's look at your argument about streaming entertainment. Currently plugged into my house, I have 2 TVs and 4 computer monitors. I use these to stream entertainment (among other things). Is it wasteful? Yeah, but entertainment is necessary for a balanced life and mental well-being. Are my 6 screens wasteful? To some extent, although most of that waste is a byproduct of manufacturing where the 'off' button doesn't turn my screens off; it just puts then in a sleep mode which consumes power. So all 6 screens consume some amount of electricity 24 hours a day. This is a problem which should be fixed. This is a problem with most modern appliances. It contributes to enough excess energy consumption that it even has its own name--vampire electricity. You see? People can have critiques of both at the same time. But even if you take all the vampire electricity my appliances consume, it's still a drop in the bucket compared with what it takes to mine fake internet money.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - websites2323 6y ago
    Hi, I oppose bitcoin and have lots to say about the sheer waste and pollution that most of us take part in. I also put my money where my mouth is! I drive electric and charge only at my employer, which uses 100% solar. I don’t eat meat. I shop at package free groceries. I eat as much local food as possible. I don’t stream movies or music. We exist, my friend, but that’s besides the point. There are no saints in systems as complex as energy. You can only take aim at the big stuff and hope you can make an impact. Bitcoin is entirely unnecessary, unlike eating and driving. Participating is a choice. And it’s a bad choice.
aww_dang 6y ago
Personally, I am of the opinion that individuals should be able to use electricity however they choose, provided they pay a market rate for it. Interesting to see HN praising the CCP's policies in this regard.
- blululu 6y ago
  Market rates for electricity do not exist in a country where the power grid is controlled by communists. Given that most countries subsidize electricity consumption the same basic issue applies. Looking beyond naive libertarianism, there is the bigger question of waste and whether people are entitled to consume a resource regardless of the application. Historically efficiency was seen as a virtue, but modern attitudes are more open to waste. It’s a fair question to ask whether this is an aberration.
  - aww_dang 6y ago
    >Market rates for electricity do not exist in a country where the power grid is controlled by communists. Given that most countries subsidize electricity consumption the same basic issue applies. Yes, that's a problem in my view. Observing that it is the status quo doesn't rationalize it or further prohibitions to defend price controls. I'm not sure if you would regard it as naive, but price controls are widely regarded as inefficient distortions of a market. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls#Criticism
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      I live in Québec. We have state run electricty, which turns a profit and isn't subsidized. It's by far the cheapest in North America, and the essentially the cheapest unsubsidized energy in the world. The grid is also 99.9% renewable (everywhere except for some islands) So the idea that price controls and nationalization somehow causes inefficiency in this case is just a tale economists tell themselves. In the real world, all of the most successful energy grids use those tools. In other words, you're arguing against reality.

whoknew1122 6y ago

It's almost as if people's thoughts can change and evolve. I honestly wonder when and how changing your mind became a bad thing. Show me someone whose thoughts or ideas don't evolve and I'll show you someone who's wasting their life.

virtue3 6y ago
I suspect a lot of people didn't realize how much power was being used for bitcoin. New information should ideally get people to re-evaluate their initial opinions about something (ideally).
- cesarb 6y ago
  > I suspect a lot of people didn't realize how much power was being used for bitcoin. And another thing which changed is that, every time the price of Bitcoin increases, it can (and will) use more power (the amount of power a Bitcoin miner uses is limited by how much power it can buy with the mining rewards, because if it used more power than that, it would be mining at a loss). There's a lot of difference between when one Bitcoin was USD 1, when it was USD 4000, and now that it's over USD 50000. Someone who was OK with how much power the Bitcoin network used back when the per-block mining reward was around USD 50, might not be OK with how much power the Bitcoin network uses now that the per-block mining reward is over USD 325000.
ravenstine 6y ago
Could be that, and it can also be that people are capable of being massive hypocrites. Nobody who opposes Bitcoin on environmental grounds has anything to say about the sheer waste and pollution that most of us take part in. If Bitcoin is so bad for using as much energy as Argentina, then we should stop using energy to stream entertainment, which we are doing now more than ever.
- whoknew1122 6y ago
  > "Nobody who opposes Bitcoin on environmental grounds has anything to say about the sheer waste and pollution that most of us take part in." [citation needed] > "If Bitcoin is so bad for using as much energy as Argentina, then we should stop using energy to stream entertainment, which we are doing now more than ever." Until we get off fossil-fuel based electricity, all environmental arguments are going to be based off marginal utility. There's a trade-off. I personally think that Bitcoin at best is an unregulated financial market and at worst fake internet money. The fact mining contributes to more energy consumption than entire countries is worrying to me. It's a problem that's only going to get worse. On the other hand, let's look at your argument about streaming entertainment. Currently plugged into my house, I have 2 TVs and 4 computer monitors. I use these to stream entertainment (among other things). Is it wasteful? Yeah, but entertainment is necessary for a balanced life and mental well-being. Are my 6 screens wasteful? To some extent, although most of that waste is a byproduct of manufacturing where the 'off' button doesn't turn my screens off; it just puts then in a sleep mode which consumes power. So all 6 screens consume some amount of electricity 24 hours a day. This is a problem which should be fixed. This is a problem with most modern appliances. It contributes to enough excess energy consumption that it even has its own name--vampire electricity. You see? People can have critiques of both at the same time. But even if you take all the vampire electricity my appliances consume, it's still a drop in the bucket compared with what it takes to mine fake internet money.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- websites2323 6y ago
  Hi, I oppose bitcoin and have lots to say about the sheer waste and pollution that most of us take part in. I also put my money where my mouth is! I drive electric and charge only at my employer, which uses 100% solar. I don’t eat meat. I shop at package free groceries. I eat as much local food as possible. I don’t stream movies or music. We exist, my friend, but that’s besides the point. There are no saints in systems as complex as energy. You can only take aim at the big stuff and hope you can make an impact. Bitcoin is entirely unnecessary, unlike eating and driving. Participating is a choice. And it’s a bad choice.

aww_dang 6y ago

Personally, I am of the opinion that individuals should be able to use electricity however they choose, provided they pay a market rate for it. Interesting to see HN praising the CCP's policies in this regard.

blululu 6y ago
Market rates for electricity do not exist in a country where the power grid is controlled by communists. Given that most countries subsidize electricity consumption the same basic issue applies. Looking beyond naive libertarianism, there is the bigger question of waste and whether people are entitled to consume a resource regardless of the application. Historically efficiency was seen as a virtue, but modern attitudes are more open to waste. It’s a fair question to ask whether this is an aberration.
- aww_dang 6y ago
  >Market rates for electricity do not exist in a country where the power grid is controlled by communists. Given that most countries subsidize electricity consumption the same basic issue applies. Yes, that's a problem in my view. Observing that it is the status quo doesn't rationalize it or further prohibitions to defend price controls. I'm not sure if you would regard it as naive, but price controls are widely regarded as inefficient distortions of a market. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls#Criticism
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    I live in Québec. We have state run electricty, which turns a profit and isn't subsidized. It's by far the cheapest in North America, and the essentially the cheapest unsubsidized energy in the world. The grid is also 99.9% renewable (everywhere except for some islands) So the idea that price controls and nationalization somehow causes inefficiency in this case is just a tale economists tell themselves. In the real world, all of the most successful energy grids use those tools. In other words, you're arguing against reality.