10 ms·

Electricity there is very cheap (ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 US cents per kWh). The government has closed around 300 mining facilities in order to reduce energy sh

• WanderPanda 6y ago
  Instead of trying to remove the symptoms, the government should focus on increasing their peoples productivity to put them in a position to pay higher electricity prices
  • ArkanExplorer 6y ago
    No, the Government should petition bigger Governments to regulate (/ban) what is clearly a waste of Earth's and Humanity's resources.
    • NullPrefix 6y ago
      Are you talking about capitalism in general or just some specific activity?
      • ArkanExplorer 6y ago
        I am talking about Proof-of-Work being attached to an 'asset' of astronomical value. Governments should ban the transaction of PoW cryptocurrencies on environmental grounds, in addition to the misallocation of computer chips.
        • disruptalot 6y ago
          Bitcoin without PoW has no value. It's the entire reason it works. Without expending a finite resource to produce another, you can't constrain a money supply nor prevent it from attacks. Governments would be unwise to ban a voluntary system for the same reason they don't ban any other uses of energy that people question the value of (there are plenty). In any case, it will not stop, only move. If not to another massive farm in a favorable jurisdiction (that could be captured) then to smaller sections where it is unidentifiable.
          • chromanoid 6y ago
            There are many things governments rightfully ban for ecological reasons (e.g. energy inefficient house building, inefficient light bulbs, single-use plastic, blast fishing, many forms of waste disposal). Just because Bitcoin happens on the computer should not exempt it from that.
          • codecamper 6y ago
            Well then if we must choose between planet, and greaseballs, we'll choose the planet any day.
          • findff 6y ago
            Communists hate proof of work.
          • dgellow 6y ago
            > Bitcoin without PoW has no value Exactly. It’s broken by design. Let’s get rid of it ASAP and instead focus on blockchains that may have value without the horrible incentives of PoW. We shouldn’t keep Bitcoin alive just because it was the first successful attempt. That has been tried, it’s now clear it’s not sustainable over the long-term. We should learn the lesson and move on to a better approach.
            • keymone 6y ago
              > It’s broken by design. it's genius by design. so far nothing other than PoW was shown to work. > We shouldn’t keep Bitcoin alive just because it was the first successful attempt. you're not keeping it alive, it exists in a free market and there is demand for it. > That has been tried, it’s now clear it’s not sustainable over the long-term. not clear at all. so far looks like it's the most sustainable system of decentralized value storage and transfer compared to all others.
              • chromanoid 6y ago
                >> That has been tried, it’s now clear it’s not sustainable over the long-term. > not clear at all. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/ https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/ So sustainable...
    • danlugo92 6y ago
      If bitcoin is so bad why not let the free market tank it eventually?
      • UncleMeat 6y ago
        Because the free market isn't great at finding solutions that incorporate externalities, especially not quickly.
        • keymone 6y ago
          externalities in this case are caused by energy producers, not consumers.
          • danlugo92 6y ago
            Hacker news both advocates for nuclear while targeting bitcoin because of energy consumption, that's quite a dichotomy right there.
  • f311a 6y ago
    You can't do that in a country where $200 is considered a very good monthly salary.
• Nextgrid 6y ago
  This seems like the wrong approach. I don't see how closing large-scale mining facilities will suddenly solve the problem. As long as the energy remains cheap, mining will just move underground. I could see miners offering ordinary villagers kickbacks to "host" a few miners on their premises as to conceal the energy consumption behind what appears to be legitimate usage.
  • saagarjha 6y ago
    Laundering significant amounts of energy usage is nontrivial. Underground mining will be an order of magnitude smaller in scale.
  • georgyo 6y ago
    What is the alternative? Raise energy costs for people who may not be able to afford it because of of a few abusers?
    • chii 6y ago
      raise the price by tiers. A person can only use so much, but mining btc has infinite appetite. The price of electricity should reflect the cost, and subsidies should only be targeted at limited cases.
    • em500 6y ago
      I'm curious why electricity is so cheap there. If it's caused by subsidies, the alternative is obviously replacing the subsidies by income transfers. If it's not caused by subsidies, there must be a better way to profit from their competitive advantage of being able to produce electricity cheaper than anyone else in the world.
      • pas 6y ago
        Unenforced, uncollected bills. Also many mining ops just steal electricity. Why can folks get away with it? Because it's a failed state.
  • codecamper 6y ago
• thresh 6y ago
  The electricity there isnt just cheap, it's virtually free. They just dont shut you off it you don't pay.
• tomcooks 6y ago
  In some parts of Italy it's 0.042 USD/kWh (so I assume it's much cheaper there)