4 ms·

To me, this says those other "similar 'industries'" should also be regulated in this way. We shouldn't excuse bitcoin just because there's other worse offende

To me, this says those other "similar 'industries'" should *also* be regulated in this way. We shouldn't excuse bitcoin just because there's other worse offenders, we should address the entire sector. I'll phrase it this way: do high-frequency-trading and coin-mining contribute positively to the world as a whole? Are they producing goods that improve the standard of living on a global scale, tangible or otherwise? Are those good worth the negative environment and social impact their production causes? Assuming HFT/coin mining do indeed contribute in these ways, are there less energy-intensive solutions that could produce the same or a similar effect? I think it's completely reasonable for there to be regulations that limit the global impact of activities (e.g. emissions, global warming, chip shortage) for the good of the general population, especially in relation to how much tangible good they produce. That's the whole point of governments and regulations to begin with; see also, things like leaded fuels, or asbestos, or trust-busting.

fredfoobar 5y ago
Sorry, it was more for your "opinion" on PoW, not the carbon tax. > This would immediately make unproductive energy use (cough POW crypto cough) a lot less profitable, You seem to have just one target in mind that would get hit. Clearly you haven't analyzed the full extent of a "carbon tax" and your following statement seemed very naive. That said, I'm all FOR carbon taxes, it is actually good for Bitcoin and the world. I don't think there will be a LOT of PoW cryptos, there will be one (or two at most) winner and the others will use a variation of Proof of Proof (by saving state on a PoW chain). I also think that the energy usage curve will plateau soon-ish and energy usage will be somewhat constant or start trending down gradually (as the rewards are tapering off too).
- wing-_-nuts 5y ago
  You replied to the wrong guy, but I got you :^) I have no problem with all carbon intensive industries paying for their pollution. I think it would be silly for governments to go around mandating and regulating every little thing that uses energy. Simply tax at the source. Will that make my power bill go up? Yeah. Will that mean it costs more to fill my tank? Yeah. Whatever. I'm totally fine with that. If it's revenue neutral I'll be getting most of it back on my income taxes anyway. Bonus, this now lets me reduce my carbon footprint and pay less taxes. TLDR: Want less carbon? Tax carbon!
  - fredfoobar 5y ago
    Thanks, A carbon tax will be a boon for stranded/wasted energy as well, I wouldn't see why a bitcoin mining operation can't use better sources of energy to mine and be more profitable. It's based on consuming electricity for starters (not natural gas), unlike say ICE vehicles which can't switch to another source of energy.

To me, this says those other "similar 'industries'" should *also* be regulated in this way. We shouldn't excuse bitcoin just because there's other worse offende

fredfoobar 5y ago

Sorry, it was more for your "opinion" on PoW, not the carbon tax. > This would immediately make unproductive energy use (cough POW crypto cough) a lot less profitable, You seem to have just one target in mind that would get hit. Clearly you haven't analyzed the full extent of a "carbon tax" and your following statement seemed very naive. That said, I'm all FOR carbon taxes, it is actually good for Bitcoin and the world. I don't think there will be a LOT of PoW cryptos, there will be one (or two at most) winner and the others will use a variation of Proof of Proof (by saving state on a PoW chain). I also think that the energy usage curve will plateau soon-ish and energy usage will be somewhat constant or start trending down gradually (as the rewards are tapering off too).

wing-_-nuts 5y ago
You replied to the wrong guy, but I got you :^) I have no problem with all carbon intensive industries paying for their pollution. I think it would be silly for governments to go around mandating and regulating every little thing that uses energy. Simply tax at the source. Will that make my power bill go up? Yeah. Will that mean it costs more to fill my tank? Yeah. Whatever. I'm totally fine with that. If it's revenue neutral I'll be getting most of it back on my income taxes anyway. Bonus, this now lets me reduce my carbon footprint and pay less taxes. TLDR: Want less carbon? Tax carbon!
- fredfoobar 5y ago
  Thanks, A carbon tax will be a boon for stranded/wasted energy as well, I wouldn't see why a bitcoin mining operation can't use better sources of energy to mine and be more profitable. It's based on consuming electricity for starters (not natural gas), unlike say ICE vehicles which can't switch to another source of energy.