Lol zero evidence and zero capacity to provide rational arguments, much less scientific arguments (and that's what the debate's supposed to even be about, remember? lol)
And let's not forget your repetition of your dangerous claim that I have a psychiatric condition; is this how you always deal with people you lose arguments with, attempt to get them arrested? You're a disgrace of a human being, and a poor ambassador for your non-scientific opinions on climate science.
Foolish blind followers like you have rendered representative democracy null and void, because when 50.1% of people can back moronic top-down totalitarian ideas like anthropomorphic climate change, the corporate-fascist EU superstate, or electing Donald Trump, the "aggregated wisdom of the masses" is clearly a bad joke to be inflicted on the minority that can see it all for what it is: sophisticated lies, told by the same old liars.
Topic: Bitcoin is Bad for the environment, taking the worlds energy - yes? - page 4. (Read 4068 times)
June 17, 2016, 02:00:37 PM
June 17, 2016, 01:59:55 PM
Yep.
Blind faith is not taking any action, despite the evidence of climate change. Next thing your going to tell me is that the earth is flat.
I'm going to ignore you now since I don't really enjoy seeing a schizophrenic conspiracy theorist showing up in every thread.
Only if Core tell him the earth is flat.
June 17, 2016, 01:46:54 PM
You make a claim saying its the very rich pushing climate change.
Yep.
The very rich is claiming climate change is not real, so they can continue to profit off of oil. Climate change is not a religion. It is backed by evidence, its been studied for decade's. You sound like someone working for the oil companies, afraid of losing your wealth from oil.
This is the reason why America needs a better education system.
This is the reason why America needs a better education system.
Nope.
The line that big oil are pushing against climate change "science" doesn't hold water, you're clearly totally underestimating exactly the intricate lengths that despots and liars are willing to go to in order to sell a lie, even ordinary people can be fairly sophisticated with the lies they tell (you see that person who owes you some small amount of money? Notice how whenever they see you in the street, they say "I'll have it for you next week!". They're never going to give it to you).
You've clearly never examined the decades of so-called "evidence", or bothered to wonder whether critical thinking needs to be applied to the work. Everything you've said is not based on any kind of science, and entirely on blind faith in authority views.
So, please, if you have no arguments of your own and only those of others, as I've just demonstrated (that's how evidence works, convincing through demonstration), allow someone who takes an interest in thinking critically to address your side of the "argument".
And last of all, I don't think anyone who can handle basic grammar and punctuation will be able to take your criticism of any technique or institution of education seriously. Let alone those who are capable of thinking for themselves.
Climate change is not blind faith.
Blind faith is not taking any action, despite the evidence of climate change. Next thing your going to tell me is that the earth is flat.
I'm going to ignore you now since I don't really enjoy seeing a schizophrenic conspiracy theorist showing up in every thread.
June 17, 2016, 01:43:49 PM
I don't agree with this and I encourage to make every one realize that btcoin is good for environment since it is taking less energy than banks or other factories and it's users send peacefully more time in one place rather than moving here or there and using vehicles and causing pollution thus bitcoin has all plus in it always.
exactly, look at the toner,paper and other consumables that get put back into waste or burn up into the atmosphere, not to mention the processes involved to develop them into the product, every machine (alarm, cctv, cash register, counting machines, door locks, rfid scanners and whater might be used) in banks take for hydro, not to mention the 30 billion dollar head office buildings banks have eating up hydro, made by fossil fuel or nuclear power must ought weigh the costs to mine for the world itself, & i didnt even mention credit unions, or other institutions that can benifit from this technology June 17, 2016, 01:37:20 PM
You make a claim saying its the very rich pushing climate change.
Yep.
The very rich is claiming climate change is not real, so they can continue to profit off of oil. Climate change is not a religion. It is backed by evidence, its been studied for decade's. You sound like someone working for the oil companies, afraid of losing your wealth from oil.
This is the reason why America needs a better education system.
This is the reason why America needs a better education system.
Nope.
The line that big oil are pushing against climate change "science" doesn't hold water, you're clearly totally underestimating exactly the intricate lengths that despots and liars are willing to go to in order to sell a lie, even ordinary people can be fairly sophisticated with the lies they tell (you see that person who owes you some small amount of money? Notice how whenever they see you in the street, they say "I'll have it for you next week!". They're never going to give it to you).
You've clearly never examined the decades of so-called "evidence", or bothered to wonder whether critical thinking needs to be applied to the work. Everything you've said is not based on any kind of science, and entirely on blind faith in authority views.
So, please, if you have no arguments of your own and only those of others, as I've just demonstrated (that's how evidence works, convincing through demonstration), allow someone who takes an interest in thinking critically to address your side of the "argument".
And last of all, I don't think anyone who can handle basic grammar and punctuation will be able to take your criticism of any technique or institution of education seriously. Let alone those who are capable of thinking for themselves.
June 17, 2016, 12:57:36 PM
You sound like a schizophrenic with a "the government is after me" conspiracy.
Like I said, you're a highly dangerous individual making such unfounded accusations, that could get the recipient of your "diagnosis" abducted and indefinitely detained; stood upon that eternally solid basis: blind faith and ignorance.... speaking of which:
You have some of the smartest people in the world, telling you its real, and you need to take action.
Having a job title, or letters after your name, or a swimming badge on your swim shorts demonstrates precisely fuck all about your ability within a given field of endeavour.
I don't care if a newspaper or the TV news repeats-repeats-repeats endlessly that "97% of scientists uphold anthropogenic global warming", because (and welcome to the 21st century, by the way) that's how propaganda works on people without an adequate sense of incredulity: very rich people with an agenda to push own corporate media, why would those people want you to believe or know information that's in your interests? Believe that garbage at your own considerable risk.
So, instead of making accusations that seriously risk the freedom and safety of the person you're debating, why don't you come up with some actual arguments, instead of saying "arrest the unbeliever" or "someone who knows something you don't told me that fiction X is real". That's the same kind of arguments that religious people make. And they're equally dangerous and ignorant for the same reason; blind faith.
You make a claim saying its the very rich pushing climate change. The very rich is claiming climate change is not real, so they can continue to profit off of oil. Climate change is not a religion. It is backed by evidence, its been studied for decade's. You sound like someone working for the oil companies, afraid of losing your wealth from oil.
This is the reason why America needs a better education system.
June 17, 2016, 12:57:04 PM
I don't agree with this and I encourage to make every one realize that btcoin is good for environment since it is taking less energy than banks or other factories and it's users send peacefully more time in one place rather than moving here or there and using vehicles and causing pollution thus bitcoin has all plus in it always.
June 17, 2016, 12:43:53 PM
I definitely think people should look to solar.
It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option
energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month
thats how i do it, athough i plan to upgrade and get more miners where i will take out the inverter and use direct dc from the array after running it through a voltage regulator that can handle the current at the needed volts, right now im wasting energy converting it to ac then dc againIt may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option
energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month
it will reduce the need of server supplies & thats a good thing to save money on setup costs
but the inverter however allows for overnight operation from the battery bank that i plan to upgrade further too then perhaps do away with it all together
June 17, 2016, 12:27:13 PM
You sound like a schizophrenic with a "the government is after me" conspiracy.
Like I said, you're a highly dangerous individual making such unfounded accusations, that could get the recipient of your "diagnosis" abducted and indefinitely detained; stood upon that eternally solid basis: blind faith and ignorance.... speaking of which:
You have some of the smartest people in the world, telling you its real, and you need to take action.
Having a job title, or letters after your name, or a swimming badge on your swim shorts demonstrates precisely fuck all about your ability within a given field of endeavour.
I don't care if a newspaper or the TV news repeats-repeats-repeats endlessly that "97% of scientists uphold anthropogenic global warming", because (and welcome to the 21st century, by the way) that's how propaganda works on people without an adequate sense of incredulity: very rich people with an agenda to push own corporate media, why would those people want you to believe or know information that's in your interests? Believe that garbage at your own considerable risk.
So, instead of making accusations that seriously risk the freedom and safety of the person you're debating, why don't you come up with some actual arguments, instead of saying "arrest the unbeliever" or "someone who knows something you don't told me that fiction X is real". That's the same kind of arguments that religious people make. And they're equally dangerous and ignorant for the same reason; blind faith.
June 17, 2016, 10:38:09 AM
energy consumption used for bitcoin mining cannot beat the energy consumption used simultaneously for aircons, refrigerators , washing machine that also has a dryer on it , TVs and a Flat Iron . and it is not bad for the environment i guess what really bad is the Factories that is not disposing their waste properly whether is toxic or not .
June 17, 2016, 10:18:04 AM
The mining energy is used to protect/secure the bitcoin network. If you consider the energy used by US army to protect the US dollar, that is much more.
June 17, 2016, 10:07:25 AM
Human made and natural climate change is significant and real, were already seeing the effects of it. But, Bitcoin is not a huge contributor to it, at all. A lot of Bitcoin mines actually use green energy, as green energy is cheaper.
You're wrong, and dangerously wrong. There is no runaway greenhouse effect, the evidence is plain for everyone to see. Look out of your window.
If you looked out of your window on planets with genuinely massive concentrations of greenhouse gases, you had better make sure that both the glass and the frame of said window are capable of withstanding huge temperature fluctuations and highly corrosive airbourne chemicals.
But we're not on Venus, or Mercury, this is Earth. None of the scare stories will ever come to pass. Not with 0.04% CO2. Get a grip, global warming dogmatists. The end goal is to charge you taxes to breathe air outwards. You won't be dragging me down with you.
You sound like a schizophrenic with a "the government is after me" conspiracy.
You have some of the smartest people in the world, telling you its real, and you need to take action.
However, a lot of people predicting dooms day from it are wrong, very wrong. We won't live to see the full effects. Our children and grand children will be seeing the full effects. People will die from it, but it wont extinct humans. The worse effect from it will be economic, as some of the worlds most important cities are built right by the coast.
June 17, 2016, 10:00:55 AM
Human made and natural climate change is significant and real, were already seeing the effects of it. But, Bitcoin is not a huge contributor to it, at all. A lot of Bitcoin mines actually use green energy, as green energy is cheaper.
You're wrong, and dangerously wrong. There is no runaway greenhouse effect, the evidence is plain for everyone to see. Look out of your window.
If you looked out of your window on planets with genuinely massive concentrations of greenhouse gases, you had better make sure that both the glass and the frame of said window are capable of withstanding huge temperature fluctuations and highly corrosive airbourne chemicals. Because of the genuine runaway greenhouse effect such planets expereience because of genuinely high concentrations of greenhouse gases. On those planets.
But we're not on Venus, or Mercury, this is Earth. None of the scare stories will ever come to pass. Not with 0.04% CO2. Get a grip, global warming dogmatists. The end goal is to charge you taxes to breathe air outwards. You won't be dragging me down with you.
June 17, 2016, 09:55:04 AM
(I think this should go in mining)
There has been a lot of talk on this. Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".
As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss, Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste. Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so. Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum. It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet. Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work
**Title was sarcastic. But it is still something to think about?
There has been a lot of talk on this. Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".
As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss, Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste. Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so. Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum. It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet. Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work
**Title was sarcastic. But it is still something to think about?
Bitcoin is not bad in environment it is bad if all bitcoin miners stop bitcoin mining because theres no big consumer of electricity i think thats bad for community many people will not get their pay for their services if bitcoin miners stopped using bitcoin mining.. So the bad here if they stopped.
June 17, 2016, 09:52:19 AM
The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO2 atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.
Did you read and understand the research? The author is hardly a "Nazi environmentalist". There are other journals out there which suggest the same. Though they seem to be a little bias. Which part of the research do you disagree with?
No, I did not. I don't need to: energy might be finite, but it's also pretty abundant. It only really makes sense to start comparing between energy used mining Bitcoin and other large scale utilisations of energy if you make either or both of the following 2 assumptions:
- Energy is scarce
- Anthropogenic climate change is significant
And because neither of those 2 assumptions are valid (and are indeed, easily disproved), any research examining Bitcoin mining from the "uses too much energy" perspective is predicated on false premises. [/thread]
Human made and natural climate change is significant and real, were already seeing the effects of it. But, Bitcoin is not a huge contributor to it, at all. A lot of Bitcoin mines actually use green energy, as green energy is cheaper.
June 17, 2016, 09:44:39 AM
The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO2 atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.
Did you read and understand the research? The author is hardly a "Nazi environmentalist". There are other journals out there which suggest the same. Though they seem to be a little bias. Which part of the research do you disagree with?
No, I did not. I don't need to: energy might be finite, but it's also pretty abundant. It only really makes sense to start comparing between energy used mining Bitcoin and other large scale utilisations of energy if you make either or both of the following 2 assumptions:
- Energy is scarce
- Anthropogenic climate change is significant
And because neither of those 2 assumptions are valid (and are indeed, easily disproved), any research examining Bitcoin mining from the "uses too much energy" perspective is predicated on false premises. [/thread]
June 17, 2016, 09:39:29 AM
I definitely think people should look to solar.
It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option
energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month
It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option
energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month
The miner must reduce cost & cut waste to remain profitable. However there are 29-40 companies responsible for the majority? Probably closer to the lower number right? None of these key actors are looking at alternative energy at this time. Nor have any announced interest. If I am wrong and miners relevant on a global scale, who are currently using electricity have openly spoken about a sincere transition - who? That is not a "dig", me being a jerk. This stuff is just fascinating to me even if just a hypothetical discussion. Many people have brought this up, it has been discussed in detail in this forum. But those using the majority of the compute power, which is estimated to be close to or more than all Google servers (IT IS HUGE), none are seriously thinking about making this change.
Though possibly this will be a competitive advantage for newer individuals to "get in"?
June 17, 2016, 09:32:51 AM
(I think this should go in mining)
There has been a lot of talk on this. Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".
As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss, Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste. Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so. Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum. It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet. Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work
**Title was sarcastic. But it is still something to think about?
There has been a lot of talk on this. Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".
As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss, Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste. Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so. Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum. It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet. Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work
**Title was sarcastic. But it is still something to think about?
there is already another topic about it here
sarcastic or not, there are a lot of other things that are consuming a lot more power than bitcoin.
the banking system with all these branches which all have a lot of power hungry computers inside are consuming more power than bitcoin.
Your reply was a waste of energy, just like me responding. Read the thread. At least individuals are taking tome to add value. I will stop consuming energy here. The point is not what are other things consuming power. Please speak directly about the study, if you understand it. What is exaggerated or erroneous in your professional opinion? If you do not care or do not understand, this is a very complex subject. That is fine, you are like most. What I do not understand - Why bother wasting energy replying?
June 17, 2016, 01:35:44 AM
I definitely think people should look to solar.
It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option
energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month
It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option
energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month
June 16, 2016, 11:01:07 PM
besides these mining farms that are mainly mining bitcoin are located in third world countries where they waste a lot of energy and they don't care!
Who says ? Get your facts right.See the stats below,most of the full nodes are from the developed countries.Speaking of 3rd world countries and you're not explicitly talking about China,most of them suffer severe energy crises.Electricity is not even distributed to below the average section of the society,forget about wasting it on mining.
Jump to: