4 ms·

"For no benefit" is not an objective read. A lot of folks are benefitting. IMO the environmental impact of crypto is also completely overstated. There are issu

by doopy1 5y ago

"For no benefit" is not an objective read. A lot of folks are benefitting. IMO the environmental impact of crypto is also completely overstated. There are issues so much bigger than crypto's energy consumption that it's basically just a rounding error.

pcthrowaway 5y ago
1% of global energy consumption is hardly a rounding error. I'm massively excited for the potential of cryptocurrency, but there's a reason ETH is moving to PoS, and newer PoW projects aren't getting the same kind of traction.
- nefitty 5y ago
  What do you consider the potential of cryptocurrency to be? Specifically, which of those potentials excites you?
  - john2x 5y ago
    Two words: “cha ching!”
  - pcthrowaway 5y ago
    Just a few: - Decentralized payment infrastructure that can't be taken down. - Currency that isn't issued by a government - Open financial applications - Pseudonymous payments (depending on the crypto) - Infrastructure for fully transparent payments and analysis of value flows (governments and institutions should be using these) - applications whose source can be verified. Even if a web application you use promises they handle your data securely and publish source code, there's no guarantee what they're running is actually what they've published. Decentralized applications can be interacted with and viewed by anyone (even if compiled to bytecode, you can verify the contracts they've published are accurate) - Decentralized governance (the potential of this is massive, even moreso when coupled with decentralized identity) - Access to financial instruments typically only accessible to institutions. - A global, border-agnostic payment network
  - toomim 5y ago
    Micropayments
- doopy1 5y ago
  The most aggressive estimates I've seen are below 1% (maybe around half), which is quite literally a rounding error. Don't get me wrong I agree it's a lot, but it's a drop in the bucket on the global scale. What about the fact that china is pumping out something like 1/3rd of the world's emissions? What about excess livestock? FWIW - I do agree that PoW is not ideal and will largely be phased out, but there are lower hanging fruit with regards to our climate change crisis than cryptocurrencies.
  - pcthrowaway 5y ago
    There are things within our control and things that aren't. Driving up the price of bitcoin will lead to more energy consumption, so I don't buy it, even though it might lead to juicy gains. Livestock also lead to excessive greenhouse gas emissions, so I don't buy it either, even if it could lead to juicy steak. Lots of lower cap proof of stake cryptos (and Ethereum, which is moving to Proof of Stake) are likely to outperform bitcoin in terms of percentage gains anyway.
    - doopy1 5y ago
      I agree with you. I'm not talking about bitcoin, but crypto as a whole.
  - refenestrator 5y ago
    In the neighborhood of 1 percent of all energy consumption, for literally nothing, is a colossal waste. Try to think of it in tons of coal. You proud of that?
    - doopy1 5y ago
      "literally nothing" is your opinion.
      - refenestrator 5y ago
        It's a fact at the macro level. Individual speculators may profit but there's no benefit to the species. They don't even work as currencies because the transaction costs are so high.

by doopy1 5y ago

pcthrowaway 5y ago

1% of global energy consumption is hardly a rounding error. I'm massively excited for the potential of cryptocurrency, but there's a reason ETH is moving to PoS, and newer PoW projects aren't getting the same kind of traction.

nefitty 5y ago
What do you consider the potential of cryptocurrency to be? Specifically, which of those potentials excites you?
- john2x 5y ago
  Two words: “cha ching!”
- pcthrowaway 5y ago
  Just a few: - Decentralized payment infrastructure that can't be taken down. - Currency that isn't issued by a government - Open financial applications - Pseudonymous payments (depending on the crypto) - Infrastructure for fully transparent payments and analysis of value flows (governments and institutions should be using these) - applications whose source can be verified. Even if a web application you use promises they handle your data securely and publish source code, there's no guarantee what they're running is actually what they've published. Decentralized applications can be interacted with and viewed by anyone (even if compiled to bytecode, you can verify the contracts they've published are accurate) - Decentralized governance (the potential of this is massive, even moreso when coupled with decentralized identity) - Access to financial instruments typically only accessible to institutions. - A global, border-agnostic payment network
- toomim 5y ago
  Micropayments
doopy1 5y ago
The most aggressive estimates I've seen are below 1% (maybe around half), which is quite literally a rounding error. Don't get me wrong I agree it's a lot, but it's a drop in the bucket on the global scale. What about the fact that china is pumping out something like 1/3rd of the world's emissions? What about excess livestock? FWIW - I do agree that PoW is not ideal and will largely be phased out, but there are lower hanging fruit with regards to our climate change crisis than cryptocurrencies.
- pcthrowaway 5y ago
  There are things within our control and things that aren't. Driving up the price of bitcoin will lead to more energy consumption, so I don't buy it, even though it might lead to juicy gains. Livestock also lead to excessive greenhouse gas emissions, so I don't buy it either, even if it could lead to juicy steak. Lots of lower cap proof of stake cryptos (and Ethereum, which is moving to Proof of Stake) are likely to outperform bitcoin in terms of percentage gains anyway.
  - doopy1 5y ago
    I agree with you. I'm not talking about bitcoin, but crypto as a whole.
- refenestrator 5y ago
  In the neighborhood of 1 percent of all energy consumption, for literally nothing, is a colossal waste. Try to think of it in tons of coal. You proud of that?
  - doopy1 5y ago
    "literally nothing" is your opinion.
    - refenestrator 5y ago
      It's a fact at the macro level. Individual speculators may profit but there's no benefit to the species. They don't even work as currencies because the transaction costs are so high.