4 ms·
Try comparing it to smoking instead of ice cream. The personal choice argument depends on considering the externalities in a serious way. It’s a valid argumen
by zepto 5y ago
Try comparing it to smoking instead of ice cream. The personal choice argument depends on considering the externalities in a serious way.
It’s a valid argument to explore, but this piece doesn’t do any serious work.
- gruez 5y ago>Try comparing it to smoking instead of ice cream. whats second hand bitcoin?
- bombcar 5y agoDogecoin.
- theonemind 5y agoIt's a lot like second hand smoke, except instead of exposing one person to the smoke of one cigarette, you burn something and blow the wasteful, carcinogenic, lung-clogging byproducts in the face of the whole planet.
- gruez 5y agoDoesn't this apply to milk, or other forms or recreational activity (eg. off road driving)?
- zepto 5y agoYes. Generally we evaluate the environmental impact of pretty much all economic activity these days. Methane from cows is indeed something to be concerned about.
- mnouquet 5y ago> Generally we evaluate the environmental impact of pretty much all economic activity these days How about porn ? ;-)
- seibelj 5y agoThere’s no “serious work” to do - either we play the game of picking and choosing whose use of electricity is less useful than others, or we tax carbon universally. Personally I prefer Bitcoin to video games, but I’m probably a minority. However I don’t think we should outlaw video games for being a giant waste of electricity (and time).
- zepto 5y agoAre videogames a giant waste of electricity? It depends a lot on what activities they displace.
- gruez 5y agoProbably watching TV?
- zepto 5y agoIf it’s TV then it’s not additive unlike Bitcoin. It could well be a lot of other stuff, sports, resources consuming hobbies etc.
- mnouquet 5y ago> Are videogames a giant waste of electricity? What is your argument for it not being such a giant waste ? Remember, we are now living in a guilty-until-proven-innocent world.
- echelon 5y agoVideo games don't cause oil pipelines to be shut down. Bitcoin has negative externalities beyond energy consumption.
- MereInterest 5y ago> either we play the game of picking and choosing whose use of electricity is less useful than others I keep hearing this argument from bitcoin enthusiasts, and I don't understand why this is a bad thing. Electricity for heating, for cooking, for entertainment is constructively used. Cryptocurrencies are the only case I know of where electricity is deliberately used to the minimum possible effect, with verification that that was the case. The only benefit is the thrill that people get by using them to speculatively gamble. A utility isn't an end goal, but rather in order to enable some activity from it. Utilities are provided such that they can enable some benefits to society. Using a utility in an unexpected way that benefits society is a fantastic thing. Using a utility in a way that is not beneficial to society, and that prevents beneficial uses of that utility, then it is perfectly reasonable to restrict usage. In this case, since monitoring for cryptocurrency validation would be indistinguishable from productive high-electricity usage, a better solution would be to target the exchanges, to remove the incentive for cryptocurrency validators to waste electricity. Cycling through other currencies would then be treated like any other form of money laundering.