The biggest alarm bell going off for me when reading these articles is "Notably, the system could also be used by bitcoin to help clean up the largest cryptocur

The biggest alarm bell going off for me when reading these articles is "Notably, the system could also be used by bitcoin to help clean up the largest cryptocurrency’s dirty image, according to Filecoin Green’s creator, Alan Ransil." This is why I lump all cryptocurrency together, even when some projects consider environmental concerns: you're willing to cover for, greenwash and promote the worst actors. There is no scenario where intentionally wasting energy helps us solve the climate crisis. That is in part because of one flaw in your reasoning: believing that simply switching to renewable energy will solve the problem. Concepts like Jevon's paradox and induced demand really need to be general knowledge at this point... when technology becomes more energy-efficient, people just use more of it, and total energy use doesn't decrease. https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2018/01/bedazzled-by-energy-efficiency.html https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2018/01/bedazzled-by-energ... So long as total energy use keeps rising, adding renewable energy sources won't replace fossil fuels, fossil fuels will continue being used at the same (or growing) rate: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/11/renewable-energy-is-not-enough.html https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/11/renewable-energy-i... And even if you succeeded in moving entirely to renewable energy, that would not be a license to use as much energy as you please, because installing renewable energy still causes emissions and there are hard limits to e.g. how many solar panels we can install each year and still remain within our carbon budget: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2015/04/how-sustainable-is-pv-solar-power.html https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2015/04/how-sustainable-is... Relatedly, when you say "Filecoin uses about the same energy as a comparably sized data center", you're assuming that ordinary data centers are compatible with our continued existence as a civilization. The current internet may not be sustainable, we may already have too many energy-intensive data centers: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2015/10/can-the-internet-run-on-renewable-energy.html https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2015/10/can-the-internet-r... The time has come for frugal computing, and Filecoin incentivizing people to put more data storage online seems incompatible with that: https://wimvanderbauwhede.github.io/articles/frugal-computing/ https://wimvanderbauwhede.github.io/articles/frugal-computin... Finally, insofar as you're pursuing "carbon-neutral" or "carbon-negative", I'm skeptical of carbon offsets in general. It's the same financialization of everything which is a core problem underlying all cryptocurrency. Gresham's law should also be common knowledge at this point: carbon offsets are a market for lemons where the most meaningless offset will be the cheapest (because it requires doing no work) and real offsets will be sidelined or driven out of business. https://pluralistic.net/2020/12/12/fairy-use-tale/#greenwashing https://pluralistic.net/2020/12/12/fairy-use-tale/#greenwash... If you don't have a solar panel sticking out of your Filecoin server directly powering it, I don't trust it, I assume it's some sort of shell game. Relatedly, how will I be able to hold you accountable, if every project I use ends up using Filecoin or something like it, so I can't avoid it? At some point, consumer choice will be as imaginary as it is when opposing multinational conglomerates: https://pluralistic.net/2021/03/24/greenwashing/ https://pluralistic.net/2021/03/24/greenwashing/ Let me be clear, this is not an attack on your intentions, I'm sure that you as a person have ethics and there are ethical people working with you who do not wish to destroy the world. Several months ago, a local low-waste shop was using carbon offsets on their shipping, and I noticed they were using the exact fake Nature Conservancy offset exposed here: https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-nature-conservancy-carbon-offsets-trees/ https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-nature-conservancy-c... I mentioned its uselessness to them, and they thanked me for the info, and continued to use it. I think they mean well, but running their business (which I otherwise like and support) is higher priority for them than navigating the details of carbon offsets, or researching all of their limitations. So they send money to a scam, because that appearance of sustainability makes more business sense for them than the real thing. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." And so I forgive you in advance for not understanding this, but I won't forget. I think your project has bad effects, no matter how well-meaning you as an individual are.