9 ms·

The Unreasonable Ecological Cost of CryptoArt

77 points by felixr 6y ago

bsanr2 6y ago
http://sterlingcrispin.blogspot.com/2021/02/crypto-art-sky-is-not-falling.html?m=1 http://sterlingcrispin.blogspot.com/2021/02/crypto-art-sky-i...
- high_byte 6y ago
  this pie chart is great but ignores the fact NFTs are growing exponentially as we speak. once we move to proof of stake everything will resolve. however, if you consider the comparison in OPs link - "1.5 thousand hours flight" - and assume 1.5 hour flight averages $50, then 1000 x $50 = $50,000 for a piece sold for how much? millions? not only a great deal for the buyer but also for the environment, considering any business may have way over $50k in expanses (~= CO2 emissions) to generate this revenue.
  - Voxoff 6y ago
    You’re right to try to compare to emissions in a physical sale but I think your estimate is way off. Most NFTS are selling for under a couple thousand. Even over many editions, the millions figure is not common.
  - bsenftner 6y ago
    Reasoning like this is why the world is insane. These comparisons are not equals. There is no bargain or great deal, there is only euphoria from people who figured out a new way to shake the money tree. And "shaking the money tree" is a deep an understanding as many of these NFT grifters go. This is a signal, and that signal is increasing levels of fraud. Laypeople "share the fact" that the environmental expense of these NFT are what legitimize them, which is a bastardization of the concept to the degree they can't see the difference between the correct distinction and the pop culture watered down vague description.
    - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
      Why are you calling artists making a fair living off their work grifters and scammers? What's your problem?
      - bsenftner 6y ago
        Artist making a fair living sell their art, this selling of NFTs is not them selling their art, they are selling an immaterial bragging right. It's insane.
        adnzzzzZ 6y ago
        It's irrelevant what it is or isn't, people are paying money for their art. How can you tell someone like this guy https://twitter.com/deekaymotion https://twitter.com/deekaymotion who recently starting making good money off his work that he's a grifter?
      - iamacyborg 6y ago
        What proportion of the NFT mania is actually artists making money vs grifters and scammers making money?
        adnzzzzZ 6y ago
        If there are artists making money that previously weren't then that proportion is irrelevant. It's a completely voluntary system, no one is forced to use it or care about it.
        iamacyborg 6y ago
        Except for the many artists who are having their work stolen.
        bsanr2 6y ago
        Those are unauthorized. Too bad to the collectors who gave their money to scammers, but those NFTs are worthless the moment the artist declares them forgeries.
  - neiman 6y ago
    "once we move to proof of stake" -> Alas, there is no PoS algorithm (who's security does not depend on PoW blockchain), so it's not "once" but more "if we ever move to PoS after we manage to invent it".
    - Kbelicius 6y ago
      > Alas, there is no PoS algorithm (who's security does not depend on PoW blockchain) What does this mean?
      - neiman 6y ago
        It means that you validators use PoW algorithms to hold their stake (like in Ethereum 2.0) and/or write the state of the PoS blockchain on a PoW blockchain once in a while to prevent long range attacks (long range attacks = when someone steal all the keys of the validators in the genesis block, and create and equivalently long PoS with hardly any effort)
        bsanr2 6y ago
        You need to quantify what that means for energy usage, as that is the main point of contention. Fossil fuels are the primary contributor to global warming as they're used now, but no one should have any problem with, say, a portable gas generator used during an occasional blackout. You explained how this applies to ETH 2.0, how about Cardano and Polkadot?
    - je_bailey 6y ago
      Your assumption is off base. Cardano has PoS, hovers between the top 5-3 cryptos. It works,and works quite well.
      - neiman 6y ago
        No, Cardano works towards a PoS, but at the moment is federated. They began from the "Byron era" (federated by the Cardano organization) and are now in the "Shelley era" (federated by the Cardano community). https://roadmap.cardano.org/en/shelley/ https://roadmap.cardano.org/en/shelley/
  - ddeyar 6y ago
    I think it will still take years until the migration to PoS is done. Therefore why don't use a blockchain which is already PoS and has the needed infrastructure??? Tezos has everything needed. A lot of NFTs are beeing minted there right now. But it could be much more. It would make sense to spread the word instead of complaining about the bad impact PoW has. We should talk about the solutions not the problems.
  - danaris 6y ago
    > once we move to proof of stake everything will resolve. ...For those of us who do not eat, drink, sleep, and breathe cryptocurrency news, could you please explain what this means? A bunch of people have been mentioning "Proof of Stake," but it's a term I've never heard until the comments on this article.
    - bsanr2 6y ago
      Rather than having a ridiculous number of computers competing to be the fastest to complete the calculations that underlie blockchain activities (the source of the power usage), blocks are instead given to a single node to complete, and your chances of getting that block are higher the more existing token owners have "staked" with it. PoW: you get blocks because you're working hard; everyone has to work harder to keep up. PoS: you get blocks because your node is popular, within a certain limit (because you give good rewards, because your node is owned by a good cause, w/e). But this is part of the problem: people passing doom-and-gloom judgment without knowing what is going on. This information is easy to find and people have been screaming it for weeks, but it gets drowned out by the hysteria. Meanwhile, I STILL don't see any new fossil fuel regulations or a GND on Biden's desk, and no one seems to care.
progre 6y ago
I understand that NFT bound objects would inevitably be called "CryptoArt", but what should we call things like Kryptos now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryptos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryptos
codebolt 6y ago
These numbers are outrageous, and only solidify my already skeptic stance towards cryptos in general. In an era where people are encouraged to reduce their carbon emissions to protect the future of the planet, it seems irresponsible and stupid to waste hundreds of TWh annualy on solving completely pointless equations. Western governments need to step in and put an end to this madness.
- marksbrown 6y ago
  We need a functioning Carbon trading/tax regime. I don't care if does something useless with a computer, that's literally most people, I care that we don't make people pay the price of their insanity.
  - grlass 6y ago
    Indeed, targetting a specific industry seems like too focussed and approach that won't actually solve much. Especially when you have e.g. the aluminium smelting industry that uses around 10x more energy*. Arguably more useful, but the externalities of using unclean energy for that process, and all other unclean energy consuming industries, should still be priced in. If cryptocurrency miners want to use that energy, they can knock themselves out, but they should at least be strongly economically incentivised to do it in a CO2-minimizing way. * (15,000 kWh per tonne) * (63.2 million tonnes annually) = around 948 TWh sources: - https://aluminiumleader.com/production/how_aluminium_is_produced/ https://aluminiumleader.com/production/how_aluminium_is_prod... - https://agmetalminer.com/2015/11/24/power-costs-the-production-primary-aluminum/ https://agmetalminer.com/2015/11/24/power-costs-the-producti...
  - ddeyar 6y ago
    And better infrastrucure. If theres a need for NFTs then just do it on a already PoS blockchain like tezos. The migration should not be that much of a deal. Infrastructure and community is there. Tools which would help to migrate smart contracts also. I think it is really the lack of knowledge, that there is a blockchain solving the actual problem.
    - 6y ago
nivenkos 6y ago
It just reminds me of the people who pay to get "titles" in Scotland, etc. or "land" in Ireland - when you just get some pretend certificate. Like the NFT isn't directly linked to the real world, it's only useful if everyone agrees to abide by it and that you own the thing (although I suppose you could say the same thing for most property ownership).
- throw_this_one 6y ago
  Yeah lol. If there is no physical entity enforcing the contract, then the contract is worthless. Whereas with Bitcoin, the entire thing is digital. The only thing that is non-digital is the valuing of the bitcoin itself. That takes places in each individuals mind. Thus Bitcoin (store of value) is a solid usecase of this. NFTs are dumb.
  - nivenkos 6y ago
    I'm even skeptical of Bitcoin as a store of value. Sure it's deflationary, but it only has value if people will buy it. The only thing that ensures some value are transactions being made, and right now that is just a low level of illegal black markets in drugs, etc. you can't use it to purchase normal goods or services - I don't feel that justifies the current prices so it seems like a pump and dump.
    - afc 6y ago
      In case you find it useful, I'll mention that I use Bitcoin as a store of value: it lets me store a portion of the output of my production (i.e., my salary) that I don't need to consume right away. Occasionally, I convert a portion back to other currencies and consume it. I never have and don't intend to ever trade in black markets. I expect that thousands of other users like me will continue to be willing to buy/sell, needing to "consume" it (convert to other assets) at different times. In a very real sense, I've used Bitcoin to buy real things — and I really don't care at all about the fact that I had to convert to Euros first; it still was just as useful for me to store value I've produced until the time, months later, I'm ready to consume it. There are other technologies to store wealth and we can compare them, Bitcoin is certainly not the only one. But I think failing to acknowledge this would be just as foolish as pretending it is the only means to do this.
iamacyborg 6y ago
Doesn't help that this is being driven by what can only be described as a bubble right now and that NFT's are being used as a vehicle to commit fraud by selling other people's art.
- adnzzzzZ 6y ago
  This is no different than what already happens in other platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, etc where people steal other people's content to make money for themselves. There are mechanisms in place to prevent this in most of these NFT platforms just like there are on the aforementioned ones.
  - iamacyborg 6y ago
    Reposting someone's art on Twitter/IG/whatever is a bit different to literally selling someone else's art though, isn't it?
    - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
      I don't think so. Anyone who's buying this stolen art and finds out about it understands that they got scammed because it didn't come from the original artist. It may feel worse to the artist because they can see someone making money off their work more directly rather than through ads such as how it happens on YouTube for instance, but it doesn't decrease the value of their art if they were to sell it themselves.
    - bsanr2 6y ago
      Complaining that NFTs don't prevent art theft is like complaining that my physical dollar bills don't prevent muggings. Ultimately, it's up to policies and mechanisms on the level of the action to prevent that action. Moderators have to strike illicit goods; collectors have to recognize the authenticity or inauthenticity of provenance; viewers have to observe and respect that a forged, unauthorized piece is valueless, regardless of the resemblance to the original. The computer doesn't care, nor should it.
cies 6y ago
I resist this eco-shaming we see everywhere. Flying: bad. Crypto: bad. Avocado: bad. It's total nonsense. What we need is a very heavy tax on CO2eq, or on all pollution/ resource waste. A tax so heavy that we can lower other taxes as a result. This way some products and services become more expensive in relation to others: the market will optimize low-pollution. Eco-shaming is just sand in our eyes. Ban the plastic straws! Are you eating an avocado, seriously? This will not solve anything except for some people to have something to whine about.
- paulgb 6y ago
  I agree with a carbon tax in general but it misses the point when it comes to crypto. When it comes to domestic travel you can tax airlines directly; for manufacture it’s harder but you can in theory tax at the border. For cryptos, which were designed to subvert government control, there is no way to tax them since mining can just move to somewhere with less environmental controls.
  - Taek 6y ago
    That's not a problem unique to crypto, it's true of all manufacturing. And honestly I think the solution is to declare war (whether via sanctions, violence, or some other means) on regions that are refusing to be responsible with the global ecosystem. I think it's a mistake to single out crypto as a unique actor in this growing issue, and that we should look for solutions that will generalize across all industries. Because all industries are contributing to the modern ecological crisis. And I'll add, crypto does not care if energy becomes more scarce. What crypto cares about is that energy is equally scarce for attackers and defenders. If, due to regulation of production, the cost of energy goes up, crypto will use proportionally less energy and keep chugging away quite happily.
    - andrepd 6y ago
      It's important to undersrand that the EU and the US account for ~25% of the world economy each. They could push reforms unilaterally if they so desired. They just don't, because it's convenient to their business interests.
neiman 6y ago
Do NFTs (i.e., CryptoArt) add any ecological cost to the ongoing cost of Ethereum?
- iamacyborg 6y ago
  Yes.
  - randomhodler84 6y ago
    “No”. Energy usage is independent of transaction volume.
    - iamacyborg 6y ago
      More folks wanting to participate, more folks buying and trading Ether, more transactions, more CO2.
      - randomhodler84 6y ago
        No, this is not true. Mining costs (in energy) are independent of: tx vol, tx complexity, ether cost and client versions. They depend only on global hashrate setting difficulty, to ensure block times.
        iamacyborg 6y ago
        Folks aren't incentivised to mine a blockchain with little activity.
      - neiman 6y ago
        No, the amount of txs does not effect the CO2.
dmingod666 6y ago
I'm mildly glad to discover they found some good real uses of crypto..
bryanrasmussen 6y ago
Is there a solution that provides the value of the blockchain for cryptoArt without the wasteful power consumption?
- quickthrower2 6y ago
  MongoDB or MySQL. Seriously a lot of the NFTs are centralised enough that you might as well just store em in a $50 cloud hosting solution.
ddeyar 6y ago
When the tezos blockchain is used for NFTs then there is no PoW involved. The footprint would shrink dramatically. For me it is unreasonable to not mention a already existing infrastructure in an article like this.
xg15 6y ago
> ...seemingly introduces a scarcity to those assets that might otherwise be unattainable. For most of history, scarcity was something that humanity wanted to overcome (and the internet offered a glimpse into a world where it had been overcome). Now a lot of brain power is spent to "attain" scarcity. Where did we take the wrong turn?
kemonocode 6y ago
Mainstream artists are the masters of empty posturing. I am quite certain that the vast majority of them do not give a flying fuck about cryptoart's impact to the environment, one way or another. There are people who stick to their guns and those who were always critical/proponents of crypto- good! But it'll all be forgotten once the fad goes through its course.

77 points by felixr 6y ago

http://sterlingcrispin.blogspot.com/2021/02/crypto-art-sky-is-not-falling.html?m=1 http://sterlingcrispin.blogspot.com/2021/02/crypto-art-sky-i...

high_byte 6y ago
this pie chart is great but ignores the fact NFTs are growing exponentially as we speak. once we move to proof of stake everything will resolve. however, if you consider the comparison in OPs link - "1.5 thousand hours flight" - and assume 1.5 hour flight averages $50, then 1000 x $50 = $50,000 for a piece sold for how much? millions? not only a great deal for the buyer but also for the environment, considering any business may have way over $50k in expanses (~= CO2 emissions) to generate this revenue.
- Voxoff 6y ago
  You’re right to try to compare to emissions in a physical sale but I think your estimate is way off. Most NFTS are selling for under a couple thousand. Even over many editions, the millions figure is not common.
- bsenftner 6y ago
  Reasoning like this is why the world is insane. These comparisons are not equals. There is no bargain or great deal, there is only euphoria from people who figured out a new way to shake the money tree. And "shaking the money tree" is a deep an understanding as many of these NFT grifters go. This is a signal, and that signal is increasing levels of fraud. Laypeople "share the fact" that the environmental expense of these NFT are what legitimize them, which is a bastardization of the concept to the degree they can't see the difference between the correct distinction and the pop culture watered down vague description.
  - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
    Why are you calling artists making a fair living off their work grifters and scammers? What's your problem?
    - bsenftner 6y ago
      Artist making a fair living sell their art, this selling of NFTs is not them selling their art, they are selling an immaterial bragging right. It's insane.
      - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
        It's irrelevant what it is or isn't, people are paying money for their art. How can you tell someone like this guy https://twitter.com/deekaymotion https://twitter.com/deekaymotion who recently starting making good money off his work that he's a grifter?
    - iamacyborg 6y ago
      What proportion of the NFT mania is actually artists making money vs grifters and scammers making money?
      - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
        If there are artists making money that previously weren't then that proportion is irrelevant. It's a completely voluntary system, no one is forced to use it or care about it.
        iamacyborg 6y ago
        Except for the many artists who are having their work stolen.
        bsanr2 6y ago
        Those are unauthorized. Too bad to the collectors who gave their money to scammers, but those NFTs are worthless the moment the artist declares them forgeries.
- neiman 6y ago
  "once we move to proof of stake" -> Alas, there is no PoS algorithm (who's security does not depend on PoW blockchain), so it's not "once" but more "if we ever move to PoS after we manage to invent it".
  - Kbelicius 6y ago
    > Alas, there is no PoS algorithm (who's security does not depend on PoW blockchain) What does this mean?
    - neiman 6y ago
      It means that you validators use PoW algorithms to hold their stake (like in Ethereum 2.0) and/or write the state of the PoS blockchain on a PoW blockchain once in a while to prevent long range attacks (long range attacks = when someone steal all the keys of the validators in the genesis block, and create and equivalently long PoS with hardly any effort)
      - bsanr2 6y ago
        You need to quantify what that means for energy usage, as that is the main point of contention. Fossil fuels are the primary contributor to global warming as they're used now, but no one should have any problem with, say, a portable gas generator used during an occasional blackout. You explained how this applies to ETH 2.0, how about Cardano and Polkadot?
  - je_bailey 6y ago
    Your assumption is off base. Cardano has PoS, hovers between the top 5-3 cryptos. It works,and works quite well.
    - neiman 6y ago
      No, Cardano works towards a PoS, but at the moment is federated. They began from the "Byron era" (federated by the Cardano organization) and are now in the "Shelley era" (federated by the Cardano community). https://roadmap.cardano.org/en/shelley/ https://roadmap.cardano.org/en/shelley/
- ddeyar 6y ago
  I think it will still take years until the migration to PoS is done. Therefore why don't use a blockchain which is already PoS and has the needed infrastructure??? Tezos has everything needed. A lot of NFTs are beeing minted there right now. But it could be much more. It would make sense to spread the word instead of complaining about the bad impact PoW has. We should talk about the solutions not the problems.
- danaris 6y ago
  > once we move to proof of stake everything will resolve. ...For those of us who do not eat, drink, sleep, and breathe cryptocurrency news, could you please explain what this means? A bunch of people have been mentioning "Proof of Stake," but it's a term I've never heard until the comments on this article.
  - bsanr2 6y ago
    Rather than having a ridiculous number of computers competing to be the fastest to complete the calculations that underlie blockchain activities (the source of the power usage), blocks are instead given to a single node to complete, and your chances of getting that block are higher the more existing token owners have "staked" with it. PoW: you get blocks because you're working hard; everyone has to work harder to keep up. PoS: you get blocks because your node is popular, within a certain limit (because you give good rewards, because your node is owned by a good cause, w/e). But this is part of the problem: people passing doom-and-gloom judgment without knowing what is going on. This information is easy to find and people have been screaming it for weeks, but it gets drowned out by the hysteria. Meanwhile, I STILL don't see any new fossil fuel regulations or a GND on Biden's desk, and no one seems to care.

progre 6y ago

I understand that NFT bound objects would inevitably be called "CryptoArt", but what should we call things like Kryptos now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryptos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryptos

codebolt 6y ago

These numbers are outrageous, and only solidify my already skeptic stance towards cryptos in general. In an era where people are encouraged to reduce their carbon emissions to protect the future of the planet, it seems irresponsible and stupid to waste hundreds of TWh annualy on solving completely pointless equations. Western governments need to step in and put an end to this madness.

marksbrown 6y ago
We need a functioning Carbon trading/tax regime. I don't care if does something useless with a computer, that's literally most people, I care that we don't make people pay the price of their insanity.
- grlass 6y ago
  Indeed, targetting a specific industry seems like too focussed and approach that won't actually solve much. Especially when you have e.g. the aluminium smelting industry that uses around 10x more energy*. Arguably more useful, but the externalities of using unclean energy for that process, and all other unclean energy consuming industries, should still be priced in. If cryptocurrency miners want to use that energy, they can knock themselves out, but they should at least be strongly economically incentivised to do it in a CO2-minimizing way. * (15,000 kWh per tonne) * (63.2 million tonnes annually) = around 948 TWh sources: - https://aluminiumleader.com/production/how_aluminium_is_produced/ https://aluminiumleader.com/production/how_aluminium_is_prod... - https://agmetalminer.com/2015/11/24/power-costs-the-production-primary-aluminum/ https://agmetalminer.com/2015/11/24/power-costs-the-producti...
- ddeyar 6y ago
  And better infrastrucure. If theres a need for NFTs then just do it on a already PoS blockchain like tezos. The migration should not be that much of a deal. Infrastructure and community is there. Tools which would help to migrate smart contracts also. I think it is really the lack of knowledge, that there is a blockchain solving the actual problem.
  - 6y ago

nivenkos 6y ago

It just reminds me of the people who pay to get "titles" in Scotland, etc. or "land" in Ireland - when you just get some pretend certificate. Like the NFT isn't directly linked to the real world, it's only useful if everyone agrees to abide by it and that you own the thing (although I suppose you could say the same thing for most property ownership).

throw_this_one 6y ago
Yeah lol. If there is no physical entity enforcing the contract, then the contract is worthless. Whereas with Bitcoin, the entire thing is digital. The only thing that is non-digital is the valuing of the bitcoin itself. That takes places in each individuals mind. Thus Bitcoin (store of value) is a solid usecase of this. NFTs are dumb.
- nivenkos 6y ago
  I'm even skeptical of Bitcoin as a store of value. Sure it's deflationary, but it only has value if people will buy it. The only thing that ensures some value are transactions being made, and right now that is just a low level of illegal black markets in drugs, etc. you can't use it to purchase normal goods or services - I don't feel that justifies the current prices so it seems like a pump and dump.
  - afc 6y ago
    In case you find it useful, I'll mention that I use Bitcoin as a store of value: it lets me store a portion of the output of my production (i.e., my salary) that I don't need to consume right away. Occasionally, I convert a portion back to other currencies and consume it. I never have and don't intend to ever trade in black markets. I expect that thousands of other users like me will continue to be willing to buy/sell, needing to "consume" it (convert to other assets) at different times. In a very real sense, I've used Bitcoin to buy real things — and I really don't care at all about the fact that I had to convert to Euros first; it still was just as useful for me to store value I've produced until the time, months later, I'm ready to consume it. There are other technologies to store wealth and we can compare them, Bitcoin is certainly not the only one. But I think failing to acknowledge this would be just as foolish as pretending it is the only means to do this.

iamacyborg 6y ago

Doesn't help that this is being driven by what can only be described as a bubble right now and that NFT's are being used as a vehicle to commit fraud by selling other people's art.

adnzzzzZ 6y ago
This is no different than what already happens in other platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, etc where people steal other people's content to make money for themselves. There are mechanisms in place to prevent this in most of these NFT platforms just like there are on the aforementioned ones.
- iamacyborg 6y ago
  Reposting someone's art on Twitter/IG/whatever is a bit different to literally selling someone else's art though, isn't it?
  - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
    I don't think so. Anyone who's buying this stolen art and finds out about it understands that they got scammed because it didn't come from the original artist. It may feel worse to the artist because they can see someone making money off their work more directly rather than through ads such as how it happens on YouTube for instance, but it doesn't decrease the value of their art if they were to sell it themselves.
  - bsanr2 6y ago
    Complaining that NFTs don't prevent art theft is like complaining that my physical dollar bills don't prevent muggings. Ultimately, it's up to policies and mechanisms on the level of the action to prevent that action. Moderators have to strike illicit goods; collectors have to recognize the authenticity or inauthenticity of provenance; viewers have to observe and respect that a forged, unauthorized piece is valueless, regardless of the resemblance to the original. The computer doesn't care, nor should it.

cies 6y ago

I resist this eco-shaming we see everywhere. Flying: bad. Crypto: bad. Avocado: bad. It's total nonsense. What we need is a very heavy tax on CO2eq, or on all pollution/ resource waste. A tax so heavy that we can lower other taxes as a result. This way some products and services become more expensive in relation to others: the market will optimize low-pollution. Eco-shaming is just sand in our eyes. Ban the plastic straws! Are you eating an avocado, seriously? This will not solve anything except for some people to have something to whine about.

paulgb 6y ago
I agree with a carbon tax in general but it misses the point when it comes to crypto. When it comes to domestic travel you can tax airlines directly; for manufacture it’s harder but you can in theory tax at the border. For cryptos, which were designed to subvert government control, there is no way to tax them since mining can just move to somewhere with less environmental controls.
- Taek 6y ago
  That's not a problem unique to crypto, it's true of all manufacturing. And honestly I think the solution is to declare war (whether via sanctions, violence, or some other means) on regions that are refusing to be responsible with the global ecosystem. I think it's a mistake to single out crypto as a unique actor in this growing issue, and that we should look for solutions that will generalize across all industries. Because all industries are contributing to the modern ecological crisis. And I'll add, crypto does not care if energy becomes more scarce. What crypto cares about is that energy is equally scarce for attackers and defenders. If, due to regulation of production, the cost of energy goes up, crypto will use proportionally less energy and keep chugging away quite happily.
  - andrepd 6y ago
    It's important to undersrand that the EU and the US account for ~25% of the world economy each. They could push reforms unilaterally if they so desired. They just don't, because it's convenient to their business interests.

neiman 6y ago

Do NFTs (i.e., CryptoArt) add any ecological cost to the ongoing cost of Ethereum?

iamacyborg 6y ago
Yes.
- randomhodler84 6y ago
  “No”. Energy usage is independent of transaction volume.
  - iamacyborg 6y ago
    More folks wanting to participate, more folks buying and trading Ether, more transactions, more CO2.
    - randomhodler84 6y ago
      No, this is not true. Mining costs (in energy) are independent of: tx vol, tx complexity, ether cost and client versions. They depend only on global hashrate setting difficulty, to ensure block times.
      - iamacyborg 6y ago
        Folks aren't incentivised to mine a blockchain with little activity.
    - neiman 6y ago
      No, the amount of txs does not effect the CO2.

dmingod666 6y ago

I'm mildly glad to discover they found some good real uses of crypto..

bryanrasmussen 6y ago

Is there a solution that provides the value of the blockchain for cryptoArt without the wasteful power consumption?

quickthrower2 6y ago
MongoDB or MySQL. Seriously a lot of the NFTs are centralised enough that you might as well just store em in a $50 cloud hosting solution.

ddeyar 6y ago

When the tezos blockchain is used for NFTs then there is no PoW involved. The footprint would shrink dramatically. For me it is unreasonable to not mention a already existing infrastructure in an article like this.

xg15 6y ago

> ...seemingly introduces a scarcity to those assets that might otherwise be unattainable. For most of history, scarcity was something that humanity wanted to overcome (and the internet offered a glimpse into a world where it had been overcome). Now a lot of brain power is spent to "attain" scarcity. Where did we take the wrong turn?

kemonocode 6y ago

Mainstream artists are the masters of empty posturing. I am quite certain that the vast majority of them do not give a flying fuck about cryptoart's impact to the environment, one way or another. There are people who stick to their guns and those who were always critical/proponents of crypto- good! But it'll all be forgotten once the fad goes through its course.