7 ms·

Is Bitcoin is as wasteful as say, poor zoning rules where N million Americans have to commute to job centers from suburbia, burning Y gallons of gas per year? W

Is Bitcoin is as wasteful as say, poor zoning rules where N million Americans have to commute to job centers from suburbia, burning Y gallons of gas per year? We often talk about the environmental impacts of Bitcoin but look at how grotesquely wasteful we are in virtually all aspects of our living in the west. It's like when someone is hotly critical of a $10B portion of the >$2 trillion dollar national budget. I get you have to start somewhere but eliminating crypto alone won't solve any of our environmental problems without other material changes to our way of life.

muglug 4y ago
I think the environmental argument is the easiest one to make against crypto, and the easiest one for crypto fans to discount (“proof of stake is coming in X months!!”). More importantly, though, it’s mostly a way for already-rich people to extract money from poorer people. The people who “invested” in 2021 are almost all under water today, and they’re largely people who couldn’t afford to lose their investment.
- radu_floricica 4y ago
  Most people who invested in a peak were "under water" a year later. That's what a peak means.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
radu_floricica 4y ago
It's funny how when somebody is asking "Compared to what?" he doesn't get any answers, but gets downvoted to oblivion. Yey for being the right tribe, I guess.
- jmyeet 4y ago
  Because it's a bad faith argument, quite deliberately so. Why? Because it's an effort to distract from an issue with butwhataboutism. It's a really common tactic to derail an argument. Politicians use it all the time. Consider Chuck Schumer's opposition to removing a bizarrely low tax rate (15%) for hedge fund managers, called the carried interest tax credit [1]: > But in his conversations with Wall Street executives about the tax proposals, Mr. Schumer said, he has told them that he would oppose a tax increase as long as it did not also apply to other industries, like energy and real estate. If Bitcoin energy wastage is bad (which is my argument) then it's bad even if there are other bad things. [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/washington/30schumer.html https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/washington/30schumer.html
  - radu_floricica 4y ago
    Is it bad faith? I mean, you yourself used a comparison. Even as an order of magnitude, I'd like to see some numbers. Somebody talking about numbers and alternatives should at the very least not be silenced.
timeon 4y ago
It is still wasteful. There are other wasteful things but this is new technology which is not solving the problem but creating new one.
- mekster 4y ago
  How do you solve decentralized store of value without random people competing for its legitimacy?
kllrnohj 4y ago
Strawman much? Bitcoin, and most other cryptos, are both designed to be wasteful and also are directly competing with systems that are many many orders of magnitude more efficient (and useful). Bitcoin isn't competing against commuting. Bitcoin is competing against governments & ACH. Against PayPal & Visa. Against wiretransfers & banks. And it's horrendously destructive at it. People commuting don't change that. Proof of Work is an environment disaster. Pointing at other environmental issues is just whataboutism, not a defense or excuse.
- Geee 4y ago
  Bitcoin is not destructive compared to fiat currencies. Inflationary monetary policies are now causing a global recession, resulting in insane amount of human suffering. There's also climate catastrophe, wealth inequality, and all kinds of other economic and social issues directly caused by fiat currency. It's time to put stop to destructive fiat currency.
- radu_floricica 4y ago
  > Bitcoin is competing against governments & ACH. Against PayPal & Visa. Against wiretransfers & banks You're not making it look bad :)) They're all oligopolies that use their power to make obscene amounts of money and stifle any innovation that threatens their oligopoly. You want to blame somebody? Blame exactly those actors since it's directly due to them that we even need such a convoluted and horribly expensive alternative. From a strictly technical PoV you could implement micropayments in a week in a garage without any fancy blockchains.
rowanG077 4y ago
What a nice piece of whataboutism. The argument is not that nothing else is polluting and/or wasteful.

muglug 4y ago

I think the environmental argument is the easiest one to make against crypto, and the easiest one for crypto fans to discount (“proof of stake is coming in X months!!”). More importantly, though, it’s mostly a way for already-rich people to extract money from poorer people. The people who “invested” in 2021 are almost all under water today, and they’re largely people who couldn’t afford to lose their investment.

radu_floricica 4y ago
Most people who invested in a peak were "under water" a year later. That's what a peak means.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

radu_floricica 4y ago

It's funny how when somebody is asking "Compared to what?" he doesn't get any answers, but gets downvoted to oblivion. Yey for being the right tribe, I guess.

jmyeet 4y ago
Because it's a bad faith argument, quite deliberately so. Why? Because it's an effort to distract from an issue with butwhataboutism. It's a really common tactic to derail an argument. Politicians use it all the time. Consider Chuck Schumer's opposition to removing a bizarrely low tax rate (15%) for hedge fund managers, called the carried interest tax credit [1]: > But in his conversations with Wall Street executives about the tax proposals, Mr. Schumer said, he has told them that he would oppose a tax increase as long as it did not also apply to other industries, like energy and real estate. If Bitcoin energy wastage is bad (which is my argument) then it's bad even if there are other bad things. [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/washington/30schumer.html https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/washington/30schumer.html
- radu_floricica 4y ago
  Is it bad faith? I mean, you yourself used a comparison. Even as an order of magnitude, I'd like to see some numbers. Somebody talking about numbers and alternatives should at the very least not be silenced.

timeon 4y ago

It is still wasteful. There are other wasteful things but this is new technology which is not solving the problem but creating new one.

mekster 4y ago
How do you solve decentralized store of value without random people competing for its legitimacy?

kllrnohj 4y ago

Strawman much? Bitcoin, and most other cryptos, are both designed to be wasteful and also are directly competing with systems that are many many orders of magnitude more efficient (and useful). Bitcoin isn't competing against commuting. Bitcoin is competing against governments & ACH. Against PayPal & Visa. Against wiretransfers & banks. And it's horrendously destructive at it. People commuting don't change that. Proof of Work is an environment disaster. Pointing at other environmental issues is just whataboutism, not a defense or excuse.

Geee 4y ago
Bitcoin is not destructive compared to fiat currencies. Inflationary monetary policies are now causing a global recession, resulting in insane amount of human suffering. There's also climate catastrophe, wealth inequality, and all kinds of other economic and social issues directly caused by fiat currency. It's time to put stop to destructive fiat currency.
radu_floricica 4y ago
> Bitcoin is competing against governments & ACH. Against PayPal & Visa. Against wiretransfers & banks You're not making it look bad :)) They're all oligopolies that use their power to make obscene amounts of money and stifle any innovation that threatens their oligopoly. You want to blame somebody? Blame exactly those actors since it's directly due to them that we even need such a convoluted and horribly expensive alternative. From a strictly technical PoV you could implement micropayments in a week in a garage without any fancy blockchains.

rowanG077 4y ago

What a nice piece of whataboutism. The argument is not that nothing else is polluting and/or wasteful.