4 ms·

"Norton is installing a Cryptocurrency miner" sounds like when 10-15 years back it made the news when one app or one OS installed adware or spyware. We did noth

"Norton is installing a Cryptocurrency miner" sounds like when 10-15 years back it made the news when one app or one OS installed adware or spyware. We did nothing, and now it is becoming the norm. If that's the trend, then, ladies and gentlemen, we're screwed: every piece of software will attempt to monetize from user's hardware, no matter the cost, particularly when cost is on the users. Name one reason why they shouldn't do that, there's no law forbidding it except common sense. Cryptocurrency is cancer. It doesn't scale, it can't scale, it's becoming a huge unsustainable environmental disgrace, and it's the #1 reason why certain hardware is harder to find and overpriced, followed by energy, of which we have plenty but decided to waste it in mining farms. Here are some numbers, just look at the trend: from 77 TWh to 204 TWh in one single year. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/ https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/ https://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-mining-electricity-usage-more-than-google-2021-9?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-mining-electricity-u... Now just picture what will be like 5 years from now with possibly one PWh of miners worldwide pumping heat in the atmosphere 24/7, and energy prices skyrocketing because it will always be allocated to this task, therefore demand will always be higher than offer. Seriously, WTF! Of course I expect downvotes from users with vested interest in cryptocurrencies, however I politely ask others to reply with "You're wrong because ..." followed by a believable explanation. I want to be proven wrong on this.

rytill 5y ago
Isn't that just a criticism of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies?
kikimora 5y ago
This cryptocurrency rant is offtopic. Would it make a difference if Norton would install something that shows ads? As to your question - crypto is the new form of cash, different form every other forms we have known before. One exciting property is the relative independence from any particular economical or political system. Blockchain in general has potential to replace all middleman from lots of transactions. Think of property, fundraising, stocks, trade (especially overseas), etc. Specific implementations can be regulated by government(s), the point is to replace bookkeepers with machines.
- UncleOxidant 5y ago
  > crypto is the new form of cash Yeah, yeah, yeah, we've heard this like thousands of times. And yet crypto isn't being used like cash. Everyone is encouraged to "hodl" their crypto not spend it. It's being pushed as an inflation hedge like gold. Even most crypto folks don't seem to be pushing the "it's a new form of cash" narrative anymore.
- jazzyjackson 5y ago
  The machines don’t run themselves, what is this the Matrix? The middlemen are now the core developers and the whales that own majority of the asset. Are you voting for the ETH merge? Or are you just along for the ride? You still pay fees to transact, I hardly see a practical difference.
everfree 5y ago
> I politely ask others to reply with "You're wrong because ..." followed by a believable explanation. I want to be proven wrong on this. One thing you're wrong about is that cryptocurrencies are in general mined using electricity and specialized hardware. Bitcoin is the biggest outlier in that respect, with its plans to continue their mining program permanently. Ethereum has the software to end their mining program (the "beacon chain"), which is currently finalized in spec and running alongside the original chain as they finish testing it before final release later this year (the "merge" event). I always feel the need to nitpick here, as it's a common misconception that "most" cryptocurrencies are an environmental disgrace. Bitcoin is an environmental disgrace, Ethereum you could say is an environmental disgrace until they shut off mining later this year, but since the vast majority of cryptocurrencies don't use mining at all, it makes the most sense to target the ones that do rather than throwing the entire space under the bus. I also disagree that cryptocurrency can't scale, as I'm intimately familiar with the work being done with transaction execution verification by zero knowledge proof (especially Ethereum's zero knowledge rollups), but that's a discussion for another time. I'm also aware that I am in a comment thread about a company doing something very scammy in regards to crypto, so please try to distance my explanation from the disapproval we share towards Norton. Obviously I am not trying to defend Norton here.
- squarefoot 5y ago
  Thanks to you and cwkoss for the very constructive replies, that's what I was looking for. I was speaking broadly, the news about Norton just gave the chance to comment. > Bitcoin is an environmental disgrace, Ethereum you could say is an environmental disgrace until they shut off mining later this year, but since the vast majority of cryptocurrencies don't use mining at all Can you please elaborate on that? If that's the case then I've to read a bit more on the subject as I thought every cryptocurrency required powerful hardware (GPUs or ASICs) under intensive load, which of course translates in huge power demands. The graph showing an almost 3x factor increase in power consumption in just one year looks worrying to me, however if you say there are other environment friendly means, that makes the matter interesting. What are however the chances that we can correct that factor in a immediate future?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
cwkoss 5y ago
You're wrong because: - Aggressively mining crypto consumes enough system resources that most users would notice it and uninstall the software. (Norton may have an edge here because users are used to Norton making their systems performance worse) - Even aggressive mining produces very little on the vast majority of systems (really need gaming GPU to make any money). CPU mining hasn't been economically profitable for nearly a decade: Norton probably makes <$0.001 per day on the median machine. Managing a network of chromebooks cryptomining would probably be unprofitable for Norton even if only accounting for the cost to Nortons systems. Norton's only hope of making profits from this is from the "whales" with the best machines. - Multiple programs mining on the same system would split the rewards, drawing down value of such a system even further (unless they use tricks to monopolize system resources in a way that would make it even more noticeable to users).

rytill 5y ago

Isn't that just a criticism of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies?

kikimora 5y ago

This cryptocurrency rant is offtopic. Would it make a difference if Norton would install something that shows ads? As to your question - crypto is the new form of cash, different form every other forms we have known before. One exciting property is the relative independence from any particular economical or political system. Blockchain in general has potential to replace all middleman from lots of transactions. Think of property, fundraising, stocks, trade (especially overseas), etc. Specific implementations can be regulated by government(s), the point is to replace bookkeepers with machines.

UncleOxidant 5y ago
> crypto is the new form of cash Yeah, yeah, yeah, we've heard this like thousands of times. And yet crypto isn't being used like cash. Everyone is encouraged to "hodl" their crypto not spend it. It's being pushed as an inflation hedge like gold. Even most crypto folks don't seem to be pushing the "it's a new form of cash" narrative anymore.
jazzyjackson 5y ago
The machines don’t run themselves, what is this the Matrix? The middlemen are now the core developers and the whales that own majority of the asset. Are you voting for the ETH merge? Or are you just along for the ride? You still pay fees to transact, I hardly see a practical difference.

everfree 5y ago

> I politely ask others to reply with "You're wrong because ..." followed by a believable explanation. I want to be proven wrong on this. One thing you're wrong about is that cryptocurrencies are in general mined using electricity and specialized hardware. Bitcoin is the biggest outlier in that respect, with its plans to continue their mining program permanently. Ethereum has the software to end their mining program (the "beacon chain"), which is currently finalized in spec and running alongside the original chain as they finish testing it before final release later this year (the "merge" event). I always feel the need to nitpick here, as it's a common misconception that "most" cryptocurrencies are an environmental disgrace. Bitcoin is an environmental disgrace, Ethereum you could say is an environmental disgrace until they shut off mining later this year, but since the vast majority of cryptocurrencies don't use mining at all, it makes the most sense to target the ones that do rather than throwing the entire space under the bus. I also disagree that cryptocurrency can't scale, as I'm intimately familiar with the work being done with transaction execution verification by zero knowledge proof (especially Ethereum's zero knowledge rollups), but that's a discussion for another time. I'm also aware that I am in a comment thread about a company doing something very scammy in regards to crypto, so please try to distance my explanation from the disapproval we share towards Norton. Obviously I am not trying to defend Norton here.

squarefoot 5y ago
Thanks to you and cwkoss for the very constructive replies, that's what I was looking for. I was speaking broadly, the news about Norton just gave the chance to comment. > Bitcoin is an environmental disgrace, Ethereum you could say is an environmental disgrace until they shut off mining later this year, but since the vast majority of cryptocurrencies don't use mining at all Can you please elaborate on that? If that's the case then I've to read a bit more on the subject as I thought every cryptocurrency required powerful hardware (GPUs or ASICs) under intensive load, which of course translates in huge power demands. The graph showing an almost 3x factor increase in power consumption in just one year looks worrying to me, however if you say there are other environment friendly means, that makes the matter interesting. What are however the chances that we can correct that factor in a immediate future?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

cwkoss 5y ago

You're wrong because: - Aggressively mining crypto consumes enough system resources that most users would notice it and uninstall the software. (Norton may have an edge here because users are used to Norton making their systems performance worse) - Even aggressive mining produces very little on the vast majority of systems (really need gaming GPU to make any money). CPU mining hasn't been economically profitable for nearly a decade: Norton probably makes <$0.001 per day on the median machine. Managing a network of chromebooks cryptomining would probably be unprofitable for Norton even if only accounting for the cost to Nortons systems. Norton's only hope of making profits from this is from the "whales" with the best machines. - Multiple programs mining on the same system would split the rewards, drawing down value of such a system even further (unless they use tricks to monopolize system resources in a way that would make it even more noticeable to users).