Topic: [2020-01-28] Your Bitcoin Should Be Seized to Pay for Climate Reparations - page 2. (Read 709 times)

I don't agree. Let them prove specifically my involvement in this before I pay someone.

What a ridiculous thing, the banks have many branches and in all bank branches they have air conditioning. Mining companies pay for the electricity that they consume, they are customers with rights just like anyone else. I don't see how this is going to be wrong, it is up to the electricity companies to create conditions to supply electricity from environmentally friendly sources and this is also a task of governments

Yes, it's probable (as it is for the rest of us, btw). We are living in a very fast changing world today, and we can't imagine what new technology can humanity come up with in 10 years.

In order to release the tension that is building up in this thread, I want to remind you guys about the following part from Silicon Valley series:


I think we can hope, and not completely unreasonably, that something similar will happen in the nearest future, and the "Bitcoin energy consumption problem" will vanish for good.

The last time I checked, cryptocurrency mining was consuming less than 1% of the total electricity generated every year. Even if we consider all of that electricity is generated from thermal power plants, the damage to the environment is much lower than that caused by the room heating systems in various nations. So is Elianor Saitta going to ask the authorities to confiscate all the room heaters, air conditioners, dishwashers.etc? Knowing how lunatic these environmentalists can be, I won't be surprised even if she asks the government to imprison everyone who uses electricity.

Some quick back of the envelop analysis from your stats.

It takes 4 acre of land to produce 1MW using solar generators.
In order to produce 10GW we need 40000 acre land (just 62.5 square miles). Multiply it by 4 to account for bad weather and night time offline generators.
The is hardly anything considerable, especially in sun rich countries like Australia, India, and several others in Africa where land is cheap and lots of barren properties are available to be  scooped up / leased for cheap.  
Bitcoin network can entirely be supported with renewables, if need be, for a considerable amount of time in to the future.

First, this!
I lived in a socialist country until the '90 and I know what the toxic idea of someone telling people that their property is better used by the state brings!
Don't want to go there anytime soon, I've had my portion of hell, thank you!

Now, on to a bit of a misunderstanding (or at least I think so)


I never disagreed with this.
To explain the situation better, let me give you an example.

I own a car, I love to drive my car to work, shopping, almost everything. But I know that if we ever reach the percentage of personal car ownership as the US, we (my town with me included) we're f&**&. Because there is no way in hell our five-century old city will be able to take that traffic.
At the same time, I don't advocate for a congestion tax or for any other stupid thing like that, but I know that there is an increase in people driving cars around here I will spend not 30 minutes but 3 hours in queues.
Because it's obvious congestion will happen, right?
Do I have a solution for it...no, all I can do is wait and pray it won't happen.
Is this making me a car hater or some bicycle lover? I can't even ride one!!!

The same with miners, I am not for any kind of limiters imposed on mining ( one of my fears is that miners getting bankrupt might lead to some people like a fake satoshi being able to buy gear at scrap metal price, and you know what that would bring).

But, as we are right now, it is inevitable that something will happen.
Denying that this will not be a problem in the future because it's not a problem right now is never a good idea.
It's also probable that I'm wrong and in 10 years while I visit this forum I will facepalm myself thousands for saying these. Time will tell.

----

Oh, and back on the subject.
This girl is not an environmentalist nor does she care for it.
Environmentalists care first about what they can do for the environment.
The ones that are going first after other's people money are socialist, a different breed altogether, same like orcs descending from elves.

okay, that seems fair enough

but your premise is still based upon telling other people they're using their property in the "wrong" way, and your argument seems to be: wrong because other people have any reason to say it too ("I don't think miners use too much electricity, but my neighbors do..."


sorry, but you're still equally wrong for equally unethical reasons. the miners paid to consume that electricity, and it's none of your business or anyone else's.

if we agree that any arbitrary reasoning of anyone else is sufficient to override other people's peaceful use of their property, it should be pretty obvious that the consequences of that is constant appropriation and re-appropriation, then huge conflicts.


It should be obvious to you too, please think before you suggest endlessly destructive principles as the basis for solving a non-problem.

I don't give a damn about what the premise is nor I give a damn about how much coal is burned or how many pink unicorns are enslaved to produce that energy.
What I debate is that what looks like being a no problem today, tomorrow might end up as a huge one and leaving the whole environment debate aside, we will have different problems as I explained before.

I'm not one of those eco nazis that think bicycling 2 km instead of driving a car will save the planet or that we will solve every problem with green energy, and I will not enter such debate.  

But the fact is that the consumption will grow! Unless bitcoin dies and I doubt anyone around here with a working brain cell thinks this!
And with consumption growth, you will see more and more people being against it, like it happened in Chelan, Mason and many others and we're going to see people proposing even more dumb ideas as bitcoin mining tax, we will see extra vat on mining gear on top of Trump's idiotic tariffs and much more.

Right now mining is flying under the radar, when it will be a too bigger business to be ignored, there will be ...consequences.
I am just stating the obvious from my point of view, if you think that this propaganda, well, good luck with it, it's your opinion and my prediction, but unfortunately only one will be right in the end.

indeed, except not the figures you're citing

the whole anthropogenic climate change argument is the actual problematic data, as it was proven, beyond any doubt, to be fraudulent over 10 years when significant people in the IPCC fraternity were caught red-handed discussing the falsification of climate data in order to "prove" the non-existent case for anthropogenic climate change


the entire premise for this thread is a sham, you should be ashamed of yourself for helping to promote this propaganda

Well, pray!   
I stated numerous times in the mining board and in some other discussions, I have no $^^&& idea.

Right now from my point of view, the only way we have right now to not continue this absurd consumption increase is to pray the halving will take care of it.
The reward halving this year will take care of the growth even if we see prices doubling, same for the next one coming in 4 years.
So in terms of consumption, what we have right now will be the same as 2026 at 30-35k/BTC.

But if BTC price doesn't give a damn about this and it grows to some insane levels somewhere this year or next, prepare your popcorn. And buy a kettle for it as microwaving might become really expensive. 

So what would you do?

The moment you bring in gas consumption per car into a discussion about electric energy consumption is the moment you lose all credibility.


This is the problem, actual data!
It's like taking road fatality statistics from 1860 and projecting the situation in 2050 based on that.

80Twh might still be nothing but look at the exact graph you have posted:
July 2015, estimated at 2Twh
July 2017, it was estimated at 10Twh.
July 2019,  It was estimated at 60 Twh.

Right now it matters not that much but what will happen if the price grows again?
If we see 800 Twh?
Oh but it will still be only 0.4% of the world global consumption
What happens when bitcoins will go beyond the 100k?

I'm going to tell you what happens, consequences! and what happened in Plattsburgh will happen all over the place!
But it's not a problem, right, miners will go to a country where they accept bitcoin mining, of course, this will be with consequences just like every damn action on this planet has. You want all the mining gear to end up in a country like Russia where they could simply cut the entire network and seize the machine because Putin had a bad dream?

Right now on a global scale bitcoin mining means nothing. But so does bitcoin, what's that 300k transaction day and 20 million addresses with more than 1$?
It's like the economy of Swaziland (not Switzerland).
And when it will really start growing and start being used its value will grow, consequence > reward growing > consequence > more mining gear > consequence >electric consumption.

But yeah, all it's fine now, let's just wait for it.
Just like all was fine till the fork wars and the fee war at the end of 2017!
Everything is fine ....till .....it is not fine anymore.

And again I'm not advocating for PoS which is really a Piece of S, or master nodes or else. Nor do I think that changing algorithms will fix it since it's pretty obvious for anyone knowing what revenue and cost are it won't.

In light of the total wealth that is being secured by the Bitcoin network (both current, ~200bn, and future projections upto a few trillions USD), I think the world is getting a really good deal with the energy consumption of the Bitcoin network, especially when compared to the waste that is the banking industry.

Let's beat this with actual statistics, I think it's pretty obvious this person doesn't really understand anything about what she is talking about anyway.

Going off a graphic, it seems in 2018 the world used 200,000 (TWH), and following the usually % increase in electricity cost, it's fair to say that ~ 84.23 TWH has been used in 2019. Now, I am using a tool created by students at Cambridge university - https://www.cbeci.org/.

With the current bitcoin network power (which keep in mind, is even higher then the network power last year), it estimates that 10-11 GW is being used a year for bitcoin network power. 0.042‬% of electricity... That is not a much, compared to how much % other services take up.

Getting into whether or not corporations are actually taxed is a whole other discussion. I'm of the opinion that countries could do more to coerce corporations into contributing more of their profits to taxes instead of turning a blind eye to giants like Apple funneling billions offshore. But that's a discussion beyond emissions.

The core of your point is valid so long as we're talking about sales taxes. Yes, they do get passed down to the consumer, but on the way down the entire supply chain is affected. In the case of emissions, this inefficiency that tax causes, is a desired result because the goal is to reduce emissions and not to increase transaction efficiency. A carbon tax for the purchase of bitcoin miners could contribute positively to reducing the demand for miners and indirectly reducing emissions.

you mean the puny Swiss designed car in existence, the Smart Fortwo.  , where do you think the Swiss drive their cars, on the slope of Alps? Swiss use their congested commuter trains and buses as well as 2 legs to travel around and maybe use their cars during vacation outside the country. The Swiss energy footprint for all practical purpose is nada, and thus Bitcoin network's energy consumption, which is similar to this tiny country, should not be a point of debate.

You mean, corporations are supposed to collect it from the buyers of their products and remit it to the government.  People are the only entities that pay taxes, corporations etc merely collect them on behalf of someone else and divide the costs primarily on consumers and employees.

the whole point of the tech behind Bitcoin was always to reinforce the age-old principle of "it's my life, and hence none of your fucking business"

guess what? it applies here (as well as everywhere, seeing as it's a principle)


if the oil industry/government sponsored plans to get us digital serfs to pay for breathing air was actually based in factual science, then I could understand your point. But you'd have to be a complete moron to believe that nonsense, right?


Again, please stick to looking cool and feeling slightly smug about your pub-stool honed native wit; politics, science and really anything requiring the faintest level of acquired intellect are not your strong point

Yeah, and they eat chocolate all day that comes out of blue cows' horns.
Switzerland is the 10th in vehicle ownership per capita, with four countries being obviously not suited for these criteria ( San Marino or Liechtenstein).
And while the US might have more cars per capita they also have older cars by an average of 2 years.
Also, it is ranked 93 in the world by cattle numbers, but who cares about facts, right?

I assume for you it's a matter a pride to live in a natural not insulated cave by the seaside and heat yourself with an air conditioner.
But it's nice to see people ready to throw shit an entire country just to defend their point of view.


Yeah, but the moment the image is gone they would stop caring.
We do the same all the time, for most of my friends a trip to my family farm would be traumatic and they would have problems eating a hamburger but after a few days....Same with clothes, we're enraged when finding out they are made by child labor but a week after we care only about the price tag. And it's a never-ending list.

In the end, it is the personal interest that matters, it's the only thing that stays with us, feelings come and go.

the 9 million people who live like ants, in stinky insulated cottages, burning oil and wood to heat them, where AC is a remote concept, hardly drive any cars, and in a tiny mountainous isolated region full of cows.

vs

the 300k people who live in the real world, wanting to secure real wealth from destruction.

Security is expensive, if in doubt look at the American military.