6 ms·

with your definitions in mind, i think mining is a lot more appropriate, haha

by werds 5y ago

_Microft 5y ago
It is! I meant that they could have whitewashed the concept by using "minting" instead of "mining".
- politician 5y ago
  Or recycling. "We recycle electrons into coins!"
  - _Microft 5y ago
    Believe it or not but there are people who think that "Bitcoin is a battery" because it can turn energy into money (and "money is easily converted to energy again", Umm... STEM education, we need to have a word because it looks like you are not doing your job properly...). Here is an example: https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1351214402167578626 https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1351214402167578626
    - arcticbull 5y ago
      Balaji's take is easily the worst, least coherent take on proof of work to date. An absolute carnival of ignorance motivated by self-interest. The lengths people will do to defend the indefensible because it'll make them rich continues to disappoint.
      - heed 5y ago
        I agree it’s a bad take, but the idea in the article he shared is, in my opinion, reasonable and doesn’t talk about BTC being a battery. It talks about crypto mining as a last resort to utilizing excess energy produced by “green” sources (wind turbine), ie energy that cannot be sold to the grid or stored in batteries.
        arcticbull 5y ago
        That's not, however, what the system incentivizes. It incentivizes using the cheapest energy period. Miners are not incentivized to care even the tiniest little bit about where the energy comes from - as evidenced by them re-opening coal plants. [1] It's literally un-doing the progress we've made towards a renewable energy market. It's a fantasy that (a) there's actually tons of energy floating around out there in the wild that can't be stored in some way or transported in some way and (b) that co-locating miners there is more economical than throwing some coal onto the fire. [1] https://qz.com/1250980/an-australian-coal-power-plant-will-reopen-to-help-mine-bitcoins/ https://qz.com/1250980/an-australian-coal-power-plant-will-r...
        billytetrud 5y ago
        It just so happens that energy that otherwise would be wasted is the cheapest energy you can find. Utilizing that is unequivocally good. > It's a fantasy that It absolutely is not a "fantasy". It's called curtailment and it can be greater than 50% at certain times of day in certain areas. Ontario wind production for example curtails 25% of it's energy on average. Please do your research before speaking with so much authority. https://www.iea.org/commentaries/more-of-a-good-thing-is-surplus-renewable-electricity-an-opportunity-for-early-decarbonisation https://www.iea.org/commentaries/more-of-a-good-thing-is-sur...
        arcticbull 5y ago
        > It just so happens that energy that otherwise would be wasted is the cheapest energy you can find. Utilizing that is unequivocally good. Not necessarily, no. There's no free energy you can just plug into. If the energy is far-flung and remote, then you need to build infrastructure, to co-locate your miners, to build buildings, to build generators, to maintain and service these generators. If it's distributed enough, the lack of economy of scale offsets the fact that you're not paying anything for the power per se. This is self-evident in the fact these "free" energy sources aren't hooked up to the grid. There's a real economy of scale associated with a big coal plant. Hence: It is a fantasy that (b) ...co-locating miners there is more economical than throwing some coal onto the fire. > It absolutely is not a "fantasy". It's called curtailment and it can be greater than 50% at certain times of day in certain areas. That article's title alone moots your point. "More of a good thing – is surplus renewable electricity an opportunity for early decarbonisation?" If you use it for mining, it's not going to be used for decarbonization is it? The tendency is to treat this primarily as a technology problem for the power system to solve. Indeed part of the solution will lie in improvements in technology. We will need some form of energy storage to convert the excess at one time of day into necessary power system supply at another. Smart grids, especially smarter distribution systems, will be better able to manage increasing shares of renewables as well – and they too will likely have more energy storage. And finally, the growth of EVs (currently driving global battery demand) represents a huge potential source of storage and demand-side flexibility as well. That is the solution, not hashing it away lol, which was my point. Hence: It is a fantasy that (a) there's actually tons of energy floating around out there in the wild that can't be stored in some way or transported in some way. I said can't, not isn't, not shouldn't be. You've in fact strengthened by point because there's enough there to lead to early decarbonization!
    - pjc50 5y ago
      Not exactly an education issue, people can make up anything they want and education alone cannot stop them doing it; only shame and consequences can.
    - ziml77 5y ago
      These people will justify bitcoin in such insane ways. I see one guy doesn't agree that it's a battery but still thinks mining is a good thing > Bitcoin let’s anyone with excess energy manufacture sound money. This is a better option than wasting the energy. There are times where the grid is producing more energy than is being demanded but it's not like it's that difference that's being used to mine. I also don't get why that energy would need to be turned into money. Simply creating new coins isn't useful work (validating transactions is, but it's a horribly inefficient way to do that)
      - shawnz 5y ago
        > it's a horribly inefficient way to do that It's not "inefficient", relatively speaking, if there's no more efficient way to do it while still achieving the same risk profile.
        arcticbull 5y ago
        So visa is a few hundred thousand times more efficient. Are we not able to pay people without Bitcoin? The trustlessness and decentralization isn't a value in and of itself, it's value must be measured in its utility.
        shawnz 5y ago
        The efficiency of Visa isn't comparable because it solves a completely different problem than Bitcoin. And yes, in most cases we can pay each other just fine without Bitcoin. That doesn't negate its specific usefulness. It's already well documented that you don't see the trustlessness and decentralization to be a value for you personally. If that's the case then simply don't buy any. Those who do get value from those properties will use it, as is the case now.
        arcticbull 5y ago
        Sorry its no longer that simple. It's wasting as much power as all of Switzerland and all of Austria combined. 52MT of CO2 emitted annually. 10kT of e-waste. And growing like grey goo. [1] Dormant coal facilities are now being re-activated to hash noise as fast as they can. [2] This is literally everyone's problem now and we should all do everything we can, tell everyone we can, to shut this down before it's too late. Your game of pass-the-spreadsheet-cell is now actively threatening the lives of people on the planet at probably the most critical time in human history re: global warming. I have general distaste for the MLM nature of most coins in this frothy climate - but those $SAFEMOON and $CUMMIES folks are just going to lose money, not ruin Earth. I mostly do everything I can to end Bitcoin by raising awareness. You should too. I'd be just as vocal if your coin was based on proof-of-killing-elephants or proof-of-having-a-tire-fire-on-your-lawn. [1] https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption [2] https://www.newsbtc.com/news/bitcoin/australian-power-company-reopen-coal-power-plant-mine-bitcoin/ https://www.newsbtc.com/news/bitcoin/australian-power-compan...

with your definitions in mind, i think mining is a lot more appropriate, haha

by werds 5y ago

with your definitions in mind, i think mining is a lot more appropriate, haha

_Microft 5y ago

It is! I meant that they could have whitewashed the concept by using "minting" instead of "mining".

politician 5y ago
Or recycling. "We recycle electrons into coins!"
- _Microft 5y ago
  Believe it or not but there are people who think that "Bitcoin is a battery" because it can turn energy into money (and "money is easily converted to energy again", Umm... STEM education, we need to have a word because it looks like you are not doing your job properly...). Here is an example: https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1351214402167578626 https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1351214402167578626
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    Balaji's take is easily the worst, least coherent take on proof of work to date. An absolute carnival of ignorance motivated by self-interest. The lengths people will do to defend the indefensible because it'll make them rich continues to disappoint.
    - heed 5y ago
      I agree it’s a bad take, but the idea in the article he shared is, in my opinion, reasonable and doesn’t talk about BTC being a battery. It talks about crypto mining as a last resort to utilizing excess energy produced by “green” sources (wind turbine), ie energy that cannot be sold to the grid or stored in batteries.
      - arcticbull 5y ago
        That's not, however, what the system incentivizes. It incentivizes using the cheapest energy period. Miners are not incentivized to care even the tiniest little bit about where the energy comes from - as evidenced by them re-opening coal plants. [1] It's literally un-doing the progress we've made towards a renewable energy market. It's a fantasy that (a) there's actually tons of energy floating around out there in the wild that can't be stored in some way or transported in some way and (b) that co-locating miners there is more economical than throwing some coal onto the fire. [1] https://qz.com/1250980/an-australian-coal-power-plant-will-reopen-to-help-mine-bitcoins/ https://qz.com/1250980/an-australian-coal-power-plant-will-r...
        billytetrud 5y ago
        It just so happens that energy that otherwise would be wasted is the cheapest energy you can find. Utilizing that is unequivocally good. > It's a fantasy that It absolutely is not a "fantasy". It's called curtailment and it can be greater than 50% at certain times of day in certain areas. Ontario wind production for example curtails 25% of it's energy on average. Please do your research before speaking with so much authority. https://www.iea.org/commentaries/more-of-a-good-thing-is-surplus-renewable-electricity-an-opportunity-for-early-decarbonisation https://www.iea.org/commentaries/more-of-a-good-thing-is-sur...
        arcticbull 5y ago
        > It just so happens that energy that otherwise would be wasted is the cheapest energy you can find. Utilizing that is unequivocally good. Not necessarily, no. There's no free energy you can just plug into. If the energy is far-flung and remote, then you need to build infrastructure, to co-locate your miners, to build buildings, to build generators, to maintain and service these generators. If it's distributed enough, the lack of economy of scale offsets the fact that you're not paying anything for the power per se. This is self-evident in the fact these "free" energy sources aren't hooked up to the grid. There's a real economy of scale associated with a big coal plant. Hence: It is a fantasy that (b) ...co-locating miners there is more economical than throwing some coal onto the fire. > It absolutely is not a "fantasy". It's called curtailment and it can be greater than 50% at certain times of day in certain areas. That article's title alone moots your point. "More of a good thing – is surplus renewable electricity an opportunity for early decarbonisation?" If you use it for mining, it's not going to be used for decarbonization is it? The tendency is to treat this primarily as a technology problem for the power system to solve. Indeed part of the solution will lie in improvements in technology. We will need some form of energy storage to convert the excess at one time of day into necessary power system supply at another. Smart grids, especially smarter distribution systems, will be better able to manage increasing shares of renewables as well – and they too will likely have more energy storage. And finally, the growth of EVs (currently driving global battery demand) represents a huge potential source of storage and demand-side flexibility as well. That is the solution, not hashing it away lol, which was my point. Hence: It is a fantasy that (a) there's actually tons of energy floating around out there in the wild that can't be stored in some way or transported in some way. I said can't, not isn't, not shouldn't be. You've in fact strengthened by point because there's enough there to lead to early decarbonization!
  - pjc50 5y ago
    Not exactly an education issue, people can make up anything they want and education alone cannot stop them doing it; only shame and consequences can.
  - ziml77 5y ago
    These people will justify bitcoin in such insane ways. I see one guy doesn't agree that it's a battery but still thinks mining is a good thing > Bitcoin let’s anyone with excess energy manufacture sound money. This is a better option than wasting the energy. There are times where the grid is producing more energy than is being demanded but it's not like it's that difference that's being used to mine. I also don't get why that energy would need to be turned into money. Simply creating new coins isn't useful work (validating transactions is, but it's a horribly inefficient way to do that)
    - shawnz 5y ago
      > it's a horribly inefficient way to do that It's not "inefficient", relatively speaking, if there's no more efficient way to do it while still achieving the same risk profile.
      - arcticbull 5y ago
        So visa is a few hundred thousand times more efficient. Are we not able to pay people without Bitcoin? The trustlessness and decentralization isn't a value in and of itself, it's value must be measured in its utility.
        shawnz 5y ago
        The efficiency of Visa isn't comparable because it solves a completely different problem than Bitcoin. And yes, in most cases we can pay each other just fine without Bitcoin. That doesn't negate its specific usefulness. It's already well documented that you don't see the trustlessness and decentralization to be a value for you personally. If that's the case then simply don't buy any. Those who do get value from those properties will use it, as is the case now.
        arcticbull 5y ago
        Sorry its no longer that simple. It's wasting as much power as all of Switzerland and all of Austria combined. 52MT of CO2 emitted annually. 10kT of e-waste. And growing like grey goo. [1] Dormant coal facilities are now being re-activated to hash noise as fast as they can. [2] This is literally everyone's problem now and we should all do everything we can, tell everyone we can, to shut this down before it's too late. Your game of pass-the-spreadsheet-cell is now actively threatening the lives of people on the planet at probably the most critical time in human history re: global warming. I have general distaste for the MLM nature of most coins in this frothy climate - but those $SAFEMOON and $CUMMIES folks are just going to lose money, not ruin Earth. I mostly do everything I can to end Bitcoin by raising awareness. You should too. I'd be just as vocal if your coin was based on proof-of-killing-elephants or proof-of-having-a-tire-fire-on-your-lawn. [1] https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption [2] https://www.newsbtc.com/news/bitcoin/australian-power-company-reopen-coal-power-plant-mine-bitcoin/ https://www.newsbtc.com/news/bitcoin/australian-power-compan...