7 ms·

Energy isn't scarce, its actually abundant. At this particular moment, clean renewable energy capacity is more scarce than fossil fuel, but there is simply far

Energy isn't scarce, its actually abundant. At this particular moment, clean renewable energy capacity is more scarce than fossil fuel, but there is simply far more potential energy in solar, wind, nuclear, etc. Remember, our planet is bombarded by solar rays 24/7 and will continue to receive this energy for billions of years. Human energy consumption has been exponential over time. We started by harvesting crops with our hands; then we we figured how to attach a plow to an ox, which increased our productivity, but required us to house, feed, and maintain the ox (energy). We figured out engines, electricity, interconnected computers, low earth orbit satellites; all requiring increased energy expenditure, but increasing our collective well-being and productivity. Rather than scapegoat Bitcoin for our climate crisis, start by addressing: 1) externalities are not captured by fossil fuel prices (you need a carbon tax for that, to fund research and to de-incentivize fossil fuel consumption), and 2) governments actively subsidize fossil fuel industries. Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment.

arcticbull 5y ago
> Rather than scapegoat Bitcoin for our climate crisis, start by... I too enjoy whataboutism to distract folks from the environmental impact of my favorite Ponzi scheme. > Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment. If you invest in massive solar and wind plants then use that energy to roll rocks up and back down a hill forever like Sisyphus, that's just more waste. Different waste, but more waste. Any energy you spend rock-rolling is failing to de-carbonize the existing grid. Bitcoin isn't incentivized to chase renewables. It's incentivized to find the cheapest power it can get its hands on anywhere on earth and then waste it. That's why PE firms are re-opening fossil fuel plants to mine with.
- scottiebarnes 5y ago
  It's a waste to you, but not to the people who use and value it.
  - multjoy 5y ago
    Sod the people who use and value it, this is literally the future of the planet.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    I mean, ok, you could make that argument about literally anything. It's a tautology. Thing has value to people who value it because people value it. Neat. It's intrinsic value is zero. It's economic value is negative, because it's a Ponzi scheme. [1] [1] https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-ponzi.html https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-pon...
    - scottiebarnes 5y ago
      What does that make central banking and fiat?
      - arcticbull 5y ago
        Money. All money that enters into circulation via fractional reserve lending is backed by demand for that same money, and enforced by the legal system. The repayment of the issuing loan. That’s where it’s value comes from. Unlike bitcoin fiat operates on a pull model - demand driven. It doesn’t start by creating supply and having people shill it.
        scottiebarnes 5y ago
        You might need to review your monetary history. Fiat required trade to be based on gold first, a peg which was then broken. Central banks can create infinite units arbitrarily. "Enforced by the legal system" perhaps means controlled by the FOMC, a dozen central bankers who make decisions behind close doors, nominated and chosen by congress I believe.
        arcticbull 5y ago
        > Fiat required trade to be based on gold first, a peg which was then broken. Fiat is by definition not based on gold. The term is [...] usually reserved for legal-tender paper money or coins that have face values far exceeding their commodity values and are not redeemable in gold or silver. [1] What you are describing is the switch from commodity money (gold standard) to fiat, an objectively better system for many reasons. This happened in 1933 under FDR in the United States, not under Nixon as many of the tinfoil hat crew are wont to say. What you're describing is at most - at most - a default on the government's obligations 89 years ago. Not a Ponzi scheme lol. Everything folks are suspicious of is a Ponzi scheme these days. > Central banks can create infinite units arbitrarily. Central banks do not create money. They at most indirectly affect the money supply via adjustment of interest rates and reserve requirements. [2] However their mandate under which they operate is to maintain low, predictable medium-term inflation targets and maximize employment. This is like saying "well, actually, the Bitcoin core team can adjust the 21M coin limit up to an arbitrary value!" They could, technically, but there's a ton of reasons they won't. > "Enforced by the legal system" perhaps means controlled by the FOMC. No it does not. When you borrow money from a retail bank, say to purchase a house, they create new money that enters the system, paired with a negative balance on their books. The new money is backed by the demand of the issuer to re-pay that loan. As the loan is re-paid the new money is destroyed and leaves the system. The legal system enforces payments in these contracts. > ...a dozen central bankers who make decisions behind close doors, nominated and chosen by congress I believe. They are nominated by the president and appointed by congress. The Federal Reserve is an independent organization explicitly to separate capricious fiscal policy from the kind of stable monetary policy necessary for businesses to plan into the future. They were created by an act of congress and can be repealed by act of congress. They act on behalf of the American people and are accountable to the American people. All decisions are published and documented along with full audits. Like the post office. There's nothing more sinister or shady about the Fed than there is about the USPS. Sure does spook people though. [1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/fiat-money https://www.britannica.com/topic/fiat-money [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation#Central_banks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation#Central_banks
- jallen_dot_dev 5y ago
  > > Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment. > If you invest in massive solar and wind plants then use that energy to roll rocks up and back down a hill forever like Sisyphus, that's just more waste. Yeah this is what I don't get from the PoW-is-actually-a-good-thing camp. Presumably if Bitcoin were to incentivize the production of clean energy it would be by using it to mine bitcoin. And even if it makes it cheaper to produce due to economies of scale or whatever, that would just translate into increased mining profits. Bitcoin is an uncapped demand on energy that will soak up all energy production up to a certain price (based on the value of bitcoin) so I don't think it can possibly be net positive for energy production/use.
- cableshaft 5y ago
  > Bitcoin isn't incentivized to chase renewables. It's incentivized to find the cheapest power it can get its hands on anywhere on earth and then waste it. And now renewable energy is the cheapest source of power as of 2020[1]. You do have a point on how there's still emissions generated in the building of wind and solar plants, though, but building wind and solar plants is still our best solution to our electrical emissions other than asking everyone around the world if they would kindly stop using electricity. "Almost two-thirds of wind & solar projects built globally last year will be able to generate cheaper electricity than even the world’s cheapest new coal plants, according to a NEW report from IRENA" [1]: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/renewables-cheapest-energy-source/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/renewables-cheapest-e...
sterlind 5y ago
y'all need to accept that PoW is a terrible, ghastly thing. I've even heard a theory that Satoshi didn't like it but published Bitcoin as is because he couldn't find a suitable alternative. if you find a way to make PoS viable and secure, you'll have saved the planet. work on that.
- louloulou 5y ago
  Literally everything good that humans have produced are proof of work. Proof of stake is the rent seeking that comes afterwards.
  - hootbootscoot 5y ago
    I have no notion of what metaphor you are referring to. In real life, POW is a waste of electricity that produces nothing external to proving that CPU cycles were wasted, with an ever-increasing difficulty in the case of Bitcoin (getting worse with time, on purpose)
    - louloulou 5y ago
      Not a metaphor. The general theory of relativity is proof of work, so is a bridge. Being too big to fail is an example of proof of stake in a system and how it can be gamed. > an ever-increasing difficulty in the case of Bitcoin (getting worse with time, on purpose) This is not how Bitcoin's difficulty adjustment works. It increases/decreases with the value of the block reward. This is proportional to the value of bitcoin, transaction fees paid, and decreasing new bitcoin issuance. Bitcoin users pay miners for their PoW because they find the value of using such a system to be worth the cost.

arcticbull 5y ago

> Rather than scapegoat Bitcoin for our climate crisis, start by... I too enjoy whataboutism to distract folks from the environmental impact of my favorite Ponzi scheme. > Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment. If you invest in massive solar and wind plants then use that energy to roll rocks up and back down a hill forever like Sisyphus, that's just more waste. Different waste, but more waste. Any energy you spend rock-rolling is failing to de-carbonize the existing grid. Bitcoin isn't incentivized to chase renewables. It's incentivized to find the cheapest power it can get its hands on anywhere on earth and then waste it. That's why PE firms are re-opening fossil fuel plants to mine with.

scottiebarnes 5y ago
It's a waste to you, but not to the people who use and value it.
- multjoy 5y ago
  Sod the people who use and value it, this is literally the future of the planet.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  I mean, ok, you could make that argument about literally anything. It's a tautology. Thing has value to people who value it because people value it. Neat. It's intrinsic value is zero. It's economic value is negative, because it's a Ponzi scheme. [1] [1] https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-ponzi.html https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-pon...
  - scottiebarnes 5y ago
    What does that make central banking and fiat?
    - arcticbull 5y ago
      Money. All money that enters into circulation via fractional reserve lending is backed by demand for that same money, and enforced by the legal system. The repayment of the issuing loan. That’s where it’s value comes from. Unlike bitcoin fiat operates on a pull model - demand driven. It doesn’t start by creating supply and having people shill it.
      - scottiebarnes 5y ago
        You might need to review your monetary history. Fiat required trade to be based on gold first, a peg which was then broken. Central banks can create infinite units arbitrarily. "Enforced by the legal system" perhaps means controlled by the FOMC, a dozen central bankers who make decisions behind close doors, nominated and chosen by congress I believe.
        arcticbull 5y ago
        > Fiat required trade to be based on gold first, a peg which was then broken. Fiat is by definition not based on gold. The term is [...] usually reserved for legal-tender paper money or coins that have face values far exceeding their commodity values and are not redeemable in gold or silver. [1] What you are describing is the switch from commodity money (gold standard) to fiat, an objectively better system for many reasons. This happened in 1933 under FDR in the United States, not under Nixon as many of the tinfoil hat crew are wont to say. What you're describing is at most - at most - a default on the government's obligations 89 years ago. Not a Ponzi scheme lol. Everything folks are suspicious of is a Ponzi scheme these days. > Central banks can create infinite units arbitrarily. Central banks do not create money. They at most indirectly affect the money supply via adjustment of interest rates and reserve requirements. [2] However their mandate under which they operate is to maintain low, predictable medium-term inflation targets and maximize employment. This is like saying "well, actually, the Bitcoin core team can adjust the 21M coin limit up to an arbitrary value!" They could, technically, but there's a ton of reasons they won't. > "Enforced by the legal system" perhaps means controlled by the FOMC. No it does not. When you borrow money from a retail bank, say to purchase a house, they create new money that enters the system, paired with a negative balance on their books. The new money is backed by the demand of the issuer to re-pay that loan. As the loan is re-paid the new money is destroyed and leaves the system. The legal system enforces payments in these contracts. > ...a dozen central bankers who make decisions behind close doors, nominated and chosen by congress I believe. They are nominated by the president and appointed by congress. The Federal Reserve is an independent organization explicitly to separate capricious fiscal policy from the kind of stable monetary policy necessary for businesses to plan into the future. They were created by an act of congress and can be repealed by act of congress. They act on behalf of the American people and are accountable to the American people. All decisions are published and documented along with full audits. Like the post office. There's nothing more sinister or shady about the Fed than there is about the USPS. Sure does spook people though. [1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/fiat-money https://www.britannica.com/topic/fiat-money [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation#Central_banks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation#Central_banks
jallen_dot_dev 5y ago
> > Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment. > If you invest in massive solar and wind plants then use that energy to roll rocks up and back down a hill forever like Sisyphus, that's just more waste. Yeah this is what I don't get from the PoW-is-actually-a-good-thing camp. Presumably if Bitcoin were to incentivize the production of clean energy it would be by using it to mine bitcoin. And even if it makes it cheaper to produce due to economies of scale or whatever, that would just translate into increased mining profits. Bitcoin is an uncapped demand on energy that will soak up all energy production up to a certain price (based on the value of bitcoin) so I don't think it can possibly be net positive for energy production/use.
cableshaft 5y ago
> Bitcoin isn't incentivized to chase renewables. It's incentivized to find the cheapest power it can get its hands on anywhere on earth and then waste it. And now renewable energy is the cheapest source of power as of 2020[1]. You do have a point on how there's still emissions generated in the building of wind and solar plants, though, but building wind and solar plants is still our best solution to our electrical emissions other than asking everyone around the world if they would kindly stop using electricity. "Almost two-thirds of wind & solar projects built globally last year will be able to generate cheaper electricity than even the world’s cheapest new coal plants, according to a NEW report from IRENA" [1]: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/renewables-cheapest-energy-source/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/renewables-cheapest-e...

sterlind 5y ago

y'all need to accept that PoW is a terrible, ghastly thing. I've even heard a theory that Satoshi didn't like it but published Bitcoin as is because he couldn't find a suitable alternative. if you find a way to make PoS viable and secure, you'll have saved the planet. work on that.

louloulou 5y ago
Literally everything good that humans have produced are proof of work. Proof of stake is the rent seeking that comes afterwards.
- hootbootscoot 5y ago
  I have no notion of what metaphor you are referring to. In real life, POW is a waste of electricity that produces nothing external to proving that CPU cycles were wasted, with an ever-increasing difficulty in the case of Bitcoin (getting worse with time, on purpose)
  - louloulou 5y ago
    Not a metaphor. The general theory of relativity is proof of work, so is a bridge. Being too big to fail is an example of proof of stake in a system and how it can be gamed. > an ever-increasing difficulty in the case of Bitcoin (getting worse with time, on purpose) This is not how Bitcoin's difficulty adjustment works. It increases/decreases with the value of the block reward. This is proportional to the value of bitcoin, transaction fees paid, and decreasing new bitcoin issuance. Bitcoin users pay miners for their PoW because they find the value of using such a system to be worth the cost.