5 ms·

Comparison why? We are in a state that every emission is a problem. And if you have a particular technology which create megatons of CO2 but does nothing for

Comparison why? We are in a state that every emission is a problem. And if you have a particular technology which create megatons of CO2 but does nothing for society besides transering money from a lot of people to less and less people what does a comparison matter?

mike_d 4y ago
> We are in a state that every emission is a problem. Some things will forever burn dinosaurs, like a diesel generator keeping a hospital going in a grid down situation for example. While cryptocurrencies might not rank as important as a hospital to you, the people fleeing Russia who couldn't take rubles with them or the people of Venezuela who can't trust the banking system have a very different opinion. Should crypto move to non-PoW systems or use renewables? Absolutely. But some CO2 generation is worth the value crypto brings.
- Melingo 4y ago
  Ah yes the few rich and digital smart people who are fleeing some country. One of the best arguments for crypto... Just that it's as easy or hard to even exchange the local currency with crypto in the first place is probably as harder than getting us dollar or euro...
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
  The only reason that is possible is that cryptocurrency is underregulated in the countries they are fleeing to, not because of any magical properties of Bitcoin. Those countries will soon regulate it to stop money laundering, making it completely useless.
lowkey 4y ago
* Bitcoin mining is by far the largest cryptocurrency consumer of electricity. * The majority of Bitcoin mining is done exclusively using clean renewable energy sources. * Bitcoin mining uses a higher percentage of renewable energy than any other industry. * A huge amount of Bitcoin mining is also done in partnership with energy utilities in a demand-response model where miners go offline immediately if grid demand spikes and come online exclusively during periods of excess electricity supply that would otherwise go to waste. By this mechanism, Bitcoin miners, for example in Texas, actually make the grid more stable and economically enable utilities to provide excess capacity to manage fluctuating supply and demand. * Bitcoin mining uses electricity to secure the network and protect billions of dollars worth their depositor's savings, allowing Bitcoin savers to avoid counter-party risk and enjoy a 100% reserve ratio, unlike say a fractional reserve bank that speculates with their depositor savings. > We are in a state that every emission is a problem. Notably, the currently dominant global reserve currency is protected, not by clean energy and mostly not even by electricity which has the potential to come from clean and renewable sources. The US military protects the value of the US dollar. * The US military is not just the largest single consumer of fossil fuels in the world, they are the largest single consumer of fossil fuels in the history of the world. * The US military consumes something on the order of 1 million times the energy of Bitcoin mining, mostly from greenhouse gas emitting fossil fuels. * In 2007 Department of Defense consumed over 4.6 billion gallons of fuel per year alone along with almost 30,000 GWH of electricity. * If the US military were a country it would rank 34th in the world in oil use and 58th in the world by electricity use [0]. I often hear criticisms about how bad Bitcoin mining is for the environment, but rarely hear any concerns about the energy used by the military. Why is that? If we are going to ban energy use, wouldn't it make more sense to prioritize the largest and most polluting users? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_usage_of_the_United_States_military#:~:text=The%20Department%20of%20Defense%20uses,(23%2C000%20L)%20per%20day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_usage_of_the_United_Sta....
- Melingo 4y ago
  You are strawmanning... You don't know if I wouldn't criticize this too but it's about crypto and not your military. Also the green washing of crypto is also dishonest. Crypto is primarily using dirty electric and we're not they actually take clean and good energy away from others because it's buying power is decoupled from the local energy market.
  - lowkey 4y ago
    To be clear, other than Bitcoin which uses proof of work, virtually all other cryptocurrencies use proof of stake which consumes only a modest amount of electricity, no more than any other server app. So to be accurate, the real issue is Bitcoin mining, not altcoins. For the record, I am not a fan of altcoins but their energy use is not a sound argument against them. The US military exists in large part to protect the US Petrodollar system that gives the dollar value. Bitcoin mining exists exclusively to protect the Bitcoin stored on the blockchain. Why aren’t we talking about the US military since it consumes 1 million times the energy of Bitcoin mining for a similar use case, Almost all of it in the form of dirty fossil fuels and with no meaningful plan to go green?
    - Melingo 4y ago
      Bitcoin and Ethereum for quite a long time and now only Bitcoin. Why we are not talking about the us military? Because it's a strawman argument.
      - lowkey 4y ago
        I don’t think Straw man means what you think it does. As I pointed out with the cases of the invasions of Iraq and Libya, both of which it is clear in hindsight were based on false pretenses, a major reason the US has such an enormous standing military with bases around the world is to protect the value of the US dollar. Again, it is not a straw man to point out that both the military and Bitcoin miners both serve to protect the value of their currencies, or that while both consume a lot of energy, the US military consumes 1 million times as much energy as Bitcoin mining.

mike_d 4y ago

> We are in a state that every emission is a problem. Some things will forever burn dinosaurs, like a diesel generator keeping a hospital going in a grid down situation for example. While cryptocurrencies might not rank as important as a hospital to you, the people fleeing Russia who couldn't take rubles with them or the people of Venezuela who can't trust the banking system have a very different opinion. Should crypto move to non-PoW systems or use renewables? Absolutely. But some CO2 generation is worth the value crypto brings.

Melingo 4y ago
Ah yes the few rich and digital smart people who are fleeing some country. One of the best arguments for crypto... Just that it's as easy or hard to even exchange the local currency with crypto in the first place is probably as harder than getting us dollar or euro...
lern_too_spel 4y ago
The only reason that is possible is that cryptocurrency is underregulated in the countries they are fleeing to, not because of any magical properties of Bitcoin. Those countries will soon regulate it to stop money laundering, making it completely useless.

lowkey 4y ago

* Bitcoin mining is by far the largest cryptocurrency consumer of electricity. * The majority of Bitcoin mining is done exclusively using clean renewable energy sources. * Bitcoin mining uses a higher percentage of renewable energy than any other industry. * A huge amount of Bitcoin mining is also done in partnership with energy utilities in a demand-response model where miners go offline immediately if grid demand spikes and come online exclusively during periods of excess electricity supply that would otherwise go to waste. By this mechanism, Bitcoin miners, for example in Texas, actually make the grid more stable and economically enable utilities to provide excess capacity to manage fluctuating supply and demand. * Bitcoin mining uses electricity to secure the network and protect billions of dollars worth their depositor's savings, allowing Bitcoin savers to avoid counter-party risk and enjoy a 100% reserve ratio, unlike say a fractional reserve bank that speculates with their depositor savings. > We are in a state that every emission is a problem. Notably, the currently dominant global reserve currency is protected, not by clean energy and mostly not even by electricity which has the potential to come from clean and renewable sources. The US military protects the value of the US dollar. * The US military is not just the largest single consumer of fossil fuels in the world, they are the largest single consumer of fossil fuels in the history of the world. * The US military consumes something on the order of 1 million times the energy of Bitcoin mining, mostly from greenhouse gas emitting fossil fuels. * In 2007 Department of Defense consumed over 4.6 billion gallons of fuel per year alone along with almost 30,000 GWH of electricity. * If the US military were a country it would rank 34th in the world in oil use and 58th in the world by electricity use [0]. I often hear criticisms about how bad Bitcoin mining is for the environment, but rarely hear any concerns about the energy used by the military. Why is that? If we are going to ban energy use, wouldn't it make more sense to prioritize the largest and most polluting users? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_usage_of_the_United_States_military#:~:text=The%20Department%20of%20Defense%20uses,(23%2C000%20L)%20per%20day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_usage_of_the_United_Sta....

Melingo 4y ago
You are strawmanning... You don't know if I wouldn't criticize this too but it's about crypto and not your military. Also the green washing of crypto is also dishonest. Crypto is primarily using dirty electric and we're not they actually take clean and good energy away from others because it's buying power is decoupled from the local energy market.
- lowkey 4y ago
  To be clear, other than Bitcoin which uses proof of work, virtually all other cryptocurrencies use proof of stake which consumes only a modest amount of electricity, no more than any other server app. So to be accurate, the real issue is Bitcoin mining, not altcoins. For the record, I am not a fan of altcoins but their energy use is not a sound argument against them. The US military exists in large part to protect the US Petrodollar system that gives the dollar value. Bitcoin mining exists exclusively to protect the Bitcoin stored on the blockchain. Why aren’t we talking about the US military since it consumes 1 million times the energy of Bitcoin mining for a similar use case, Almost all of it in the form of dirty fossil fuels and with no meaningful plan to go green?
  - Melingo 4y ago
    Bitcoin and Ethereum for quite a long time and now only Bitcoin. Why we are not talking about the us military? Because it's a strawman argument.
    - lowkey 4y ago
      I don’t think Straw man means what you think it does. As I pointed out with the cases of the invasions of Iraq and Libya, both of which it is clear in hindsight were based on false pretenses, a major reason the US has such an enormous standing military with bases around the world is to protect the value of the US dollar. Again, it is not a straw man to point out that both the military and Bitcoin miners both serve to protect the value of their currencies, or that while both consume a lot of energy, the US military consumes 1 million times as much energy as Bitcoin mining.