4 ms·

This is also exactly analogous to why cryptocurrencies should be banned entirely. They are sucking up shared resources and making the things around them (e.g.

This is also exactly analogous to why cryptocurrencies should be banned entirely. They are sucking up shared resources and making the things around them (e.g. electricity use, turning on of fossil fuel power plants, mucking up the GPU markets for productive or entertainment purposes) all around worse for everyone else not taking part.

gruez 5y ago
> They are sucking up shared resources and making the things around them (e.g. electricity use, turning on of fossil fuel power plants, mucking up the GPU markets for productive or entertainment purposes) all around worse for everyone else not taking part. that seems like an overly broad definition of "shared resources". With the exception for rentals with unmetered utilities, those are all billed by usage. Nobody says that driving a SUV is "sucking up shared resources (fuel)" simply because it uses more fuel to do the same thing as a sedan.
- dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
  To be fair, SUVs are widely criticized for that reason, too. https://www.wired.com/story/suvs-are-worse-for-the-climate-than-you-ever-imagined/ https://www.wired.com/story/suvs-are-worse-for-the-climate-t... "SUVs are the second-biggest cause of the rise in global carbon dioxide emissions during the past decade. Only the power sector is a bigger contributor." https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2019/oct/25/suvs-second-biggest-cause-of-emissions-rise-figures-reveal https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2019/... "If SUV drivers were a nation, they would rank seventh in the world for carbon emissions"
- MereInterest 5y ago
  Billing by usage is a method by which shared resources are allocated. It isn't the only way, and it assumes that the economic value an individual derives from use of a shared resource is proportional to, or at the very least correlated with, the benefit that society gains from allocating the resource to that individual. For cryptocurrency validators (I refuse to use the term "mining" as it is entirely inaccurate), the benefit to the individual validator is anticorrelated with the benefit to society.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >Billing by usage is a method by which shared resources are allocated. By this logic, is every resource a shared resource? Does the concept of ownership not exist anymore? Am I committing the heinous crime of "sucking up shared resources" if I buy a $2000 gaming PC and use it to browse HN rather than to game?
    - MereInterest 5y ago
      By this logic, yes, every resource is a shared resource. I think that's a reasonable way to view things in a world where resources are limited. The purpose of money is to allocate shared and limited resources. Ownership is a useful heuristic, both for planning ahead and for describing resources that are currently held exclusively. I'm not really sure what your point is on that one. Intended actions matter. If you buy an expensive PC with the intent of video gaming, but then find that your interests shift, I have no problem with that. On the other hand, if you buy an expensive PC for the purpose of conspicuous consumption, to show off that you have bought it, then I'd be tilting my head at you. If you buy an expensive PC for the purpose of running it 24/7 to contribute to a system that is used primarily for speculation and that has enabled the rise of ransomware, then I have a large problem with it.

gruez 5y ago

> They are sucking up shared resources and making the things around them (e.g. electricity use, turning on of fossil fuel power plants, mucking up the GPU markets for productive or entertainment purposes) all around worse for everyone else not taking part. that seems like an overly broad definition of "shared resources". With the exception for rentals with unmetered utilities, those are all billed by usage. Nobody says that driving a SUV is "sucking up shared resources (fuel)" simply because it uses more fuel to do the same thing as a sedan.

dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
To be fair, SUVs are widely criticized for that reason, too. https://www.wired.com/story/suvs-are-worse-for-the-climate-than-you-ever-imagined/ https://www.wired.com/story/suvs-are-worse-for-the-climate-t... "SUVs are the second-biggest cause of the rise in global carbon dioxide emissions during the past decade. Only the power sector is a bigger contributor." https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2019/oct/25/suvs-second-biggest-cause-of-emissions-rise-figures-reveal https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2019/... "If SUV drivers were a nation, they would rank seventh in the world for carbon emissions"
MereInterest 5y ago
Billing by usage is a method by which shared resources are allocated. It isn't the only way, and it assumes that the economic value an individual derives from use of a shared resource is proportional to, or at the very least correlated with, the benefit that society gains from allocating the resource to that individual. For cryptocurrency validators (I refuse to use the term "mining" as it is entirely inaccurate), the benefit to the individual validator is anticorrelated with the benefit to society.
- gruez 5y ago
  >Billing by usage is a method by which shared resources are allocated. By this logic, is every resource a shared resource? Does the concept of ownership not exist anymore? Am I committing the heinous crime of "sucking up shared resources" if I buy a $2000 gaming PC and use it to browse HN rather than to game?
  - MereInterest 5y ago
    By this logic, yes, every resource is a shared resource. I think that's a reasonable way to view things in a world where resources are limited. The purpose of money is to allocate shared and limited resources. Ownership is a useful heuristic, both for planning ahead and for describing resources that are currently held exclusively. I'm not really sure what your point is on that one. Intended actions matter. If you buy an expensive PC with the intent of video gaming, but then find that your interests shift, I have no problem with that. On the other hand, if you buy an expensive PC for the purpose of conspicuous consumption, to show off that you have bought it, then I'd be tilting my head at you. If you buy an expensive PC for the purpose of running it 24/7 to contribute to a system that is used primarily for speculation and that has enabled the rise of ransomware, then I have a large problem with it.