5 ms·

But you could make identical arguments for gaming, so I don't see how that applies: >Because intellectual and entertainment pursuits generally benefit society.

But you could make identical arguments for gaming, so I don't see how that applies: >Because intellectual and entertainment pursuits generally benefit society. The ability to conduct business under oppressive regimes in foreign countries also has value. > Selfish fucks continuously buying up an already scarce supply of specialized microchips for the sole purpose of greed isn't really comparable. The same happens with gamers buying up cards, and there have been shortages pre-crypto as well. > Proof-of-Work crypto has completely screwed some scientists, artists, and just everyday people who might like to just unwind after a long day. During a global pandemic. Why can't you entertain yourself with something that's less damaging to the environment, like watching a movie? > Crypto in its current form tends to brings out the worst in us. It's kind of like social media in that regard. The same could be said for the gaming community, which is saturated with misogyny and racism. I suggest we ban gaming.

rl3 6y ago
You're equating shortage driven by organic demand to that of shortage from cryptomining. The fundamental difference is that with organic demand, people typically just want one card. With crypto, the incentive is to get your hands on as many cards as you can, fuck everyone else. Then we find ourselves in this race to the bottom. Moreover, trying to equate the energy use of both activities is laughable when mining creates an environment where idle compute resources translate to lost profits. I'm sure many people have taken up watching movies instead. Thing is, the net energy use is still vastly higher because mining creates a perverse incentive for virtually all GPUs to be hoarded, while drawing power 24/7. I don't disagree that a large swath of gaming culture is a cesspool, nor do I disagree that crypto has beneficial uses. I do however think both are beyond the scope of this discussion. What I'm saying is that the Proof-of-Work model has run amok and is a net detriment to society right now in its current incarnation.
- chroem- 6y ago
  Your argument is much like answering yes to the question "Does a pound of bricks weigh more than two pounds of feathers?" Gaming still uses more energy, even if you try to rationalize it by invoking the motivations of the people consuming the energy.
  - rl3 6y ago
    It's peculiar you chose to focus on gaming. What of professional uses cases? Science, art, engineering. Even so, GPU demand from gaming is satisfiable. Mining demand only ceases once the price of the underlying instruments fall sufficiently. More mining won't necessarily make that happen. My argument is that the mining dynamic itself is potentially insatiable and fundamentally detrimental on a societal level, whilst highly distasteful at that. It's like advocating for a never-ending greed olympics.
    - chroem- 6y ago
      The focus on gaming is just as arbitrary as the focus on bitcoin, and that's my point. Gaming consumes more energy than bitcoin and yet its economic justification is even less clear. And yes, gamers do cause GPU hardware shortages, and they have done so many times in the past. It boggles my mind that your hill to die on in fighting the "never-ending greed olympics" is a tool that's predominantly used by small-time retail investors, i.e. regular people. According to your system of ethics, it's preferable to be an old-money banker that profits off of the destruction of economy, than it is to be a person using tools (cryptocurrency) designed to divest control over the economy from said profiteers. I strongly suggest you take your war on greed to Wall Street, rather than directing it at the people trying to dismantle the greedy system in the first place.
      - rl3 6y ago
        The difference is that under normal circumstances, a single GPU typically satisfies one person. With crypto mining right now, the more GPUs you buy, the more money you make. The demand is effectively infinite. The two dynamics couldn't be further from equivalency. As for your boggled mind that's seemingly decoded my system of ethics and preferences, I can't really speak to war plans I've no interest in. That said, I don't view hoarding resources as dismantling a greedy system. Two wrongs don't make a right.
        chroem- 6y ago
        My point is that, if your goals are really to fight climate change and stop greed in finance, then your priorities are ass-backwards at best, and self-defeating at worst. However, this appears to be more about control than actually accomplishing either of those goals. >With crypto mining right now, the more GPUs you buy, the more money you make. The demand is effectively infinite. Here, you admit that your core objection is other people have the wrong economic preferences according to you. The problem isn't the externalities, but rather the mere existence of the demand preference for GPUs. It's a page straight out of the former eastern bloc command economies.

rl3 6y ago

You're equating shortage driven by organic demand to that of shortage from cryptomining. The fundamental difference is that with organic demand, people typically just want one card. With crypto, the incentive is to get your hands on as many cards as you can, fuck everyone else. Then we find ourselves in this race to the bottom. Moreover, trying to equate the energy use of both activities is laughable when mining creates an environment where idle compute resources translate to lost profits. I'm sure many people have taken up watching movies instead. Thing is, the net energy use is still vastly higher because mining creates a perverse incentive for virtually all GPUs to be hoarded, while drawing power 24/7. I don't disagree that a large swath of gaming culture is a cesspool, nor do I disagree that crypto has beneficial uses. I do however think both are beyond the scope of this discussion. What I'm saying is that the Proof-of-Work model has run amok and is a net detriment to society right now in its current incarnation.

chroem- 6y ago
Your argument is much like answering yes to the question "Does a pound of bricks weigh more than two pounds of feathers?" Gaming still uses more energy, even if you try to rationalize it by invoking the motivations of the people consuming the energy.
- rl3 6y ago
  It's peculiar you chose to focus on gaming. What of professional uses cases? Science, art, engineering. Even so, GPU demand from gaming is satisfiable. Mining demand only ceases once the price of the underlying instruments fall sufficiently. More mining won't necessarily make that happen. My argument is that the mining dynamic itself is potentially insatiable and fundamentally detrimental on a societal level, whilst highly distasteful at that. It's like advocating for a never-ending greed olympics.
  - chroem- 6y ago
    The focus on gaming is just as arbitrary as the focus on bitcoin, and that's my point. Gaming consumes more energy than bitcoin and yet its economic justification is even less clear. And yes, gamers do cause GPU hardware shortages, and they have done so many times in the past. It boggles my mind that your hill to die on in fighting the "never-ending greed olympics" is a tool that's predominantly used by small-time retail investors, i.e. regular people. According to your system of ethics, it's preferable to be an old-money banker that profits off of the destruction of economy, than it is to be a person using tools (cryptocurrency) designed to divest control over the economy from said profiteers. I strongly suggest you take your war on greed to Wall Street, rather than directing it at the people trying to dismantle the greedy system in the first place.
    - rl3 6y ago
      The difference is that under normal circumstances, a single GPU typically satisfies one person. With crypto mining right now, the more GPUs you buy, the more money you make. The demand is effectively infinite. The two dynamics couldn't be further from equivalency. As for your boggled mind that's seemingly decoded my system of ethics and preferences, I can't really speak to war plans I've no interest in. That said, I don't view hoarding resources as dismantling a greedy system. Two wrongs don't make a right.
      - chroem- 6y ago
        My point is that, if your goals are really to fight climate change and stop greed in finance, then your priorities are ass-backwards at best, and self-defeating at worst. However, this appears to be more about control than actually accomplishing either of those goals. >With crypto mining right now, the more GPUs you buy, the more money you make. The demand is effectively infinite. Here, you admit that your core objection is other people have the wrong economic preferences according to you. The problem isn't the externalities, but rather the mere existence of the demand preference for GPUs. It's a page straight out of the former eastern bloc command economies.