Topic: EU proof of work ban (Bitcoin) (Read 497 times)
I think the government obviously are trying out their luck to see if their could have some negative influence on the Bitcoin network and that is why their making such law as to ban POW in that region. Miners will migrate to other countries.
I believe this topic belong more on the BTC discussion board than Bitcoin mining board:
As the world looks toward a reduction in electricity demands and consumption EU government is presently set to regulate Bitcoin/cryptocurrency operations within its region and one among the list of things to be voted on although now removed from Monday voting was the ban of proof of work POW (which have a long history of trust but high energy consumption) to be replaced with proof of stake (POS) am excited and at the same time confused on the future of Bitcoin mining and it operates in the EU, but thank goodness the vote on the ban on the proof of work blockchain mode of operation has been dropped, so that is the EU Parliament will not vote on it by Monday. As the EU considered moving from proof of work blockchain consensus (POW) to a more flexible and eco-friendly proof of stake (POS) it will have a direct negative impact on bitcoin mining which runs on the proof of work algorithm.
Will bitcoin scalability reduce the rate of energy consumption in the future to have an edge of parliament decisions in such a direction just like Bitcoin's anti-inflation mechanism
further reading
As the world looks toward a reduction in electricity demands and consumption EU government is presently set to regulate Bitcoin/cryptocurrency operations within its region and one among the list of things to be voted on although now removed from Monday voting was the ban of proof of work POW (which have a long history of trust but high energy consumption) to be replaced with proof of stake (POS) am excited and at the same time confused on the future of Bitcoin mining and it operates in the EU, but thank goodness the vote on the ban on the proof of work blockchain mode of operation has been dropped, so that is the EU Parliament will not vote on it by Monday. As the EU considered moving from proof of work blockchain consensus (POW) to a more flexible and eco-friendly proof of stake (POS) it will have a direct negative impact on bitcoin mining which runs on the proof of work algorithm.
Will bitcoin scalability reduce the rate of energy consumption in the future to have an edge of parliament decisions in such a direction just like Bitcoin's anti-inflation mechanism
further reading
I don't believe they care at energy consumption at all. How would they end the things that contribute to the economy? Burning more fuels means generating more income, if they cared, they would've taken the advise of the recent scientists who protested on the effects to our planet. Bitcoin mining will be there until all bitcoins are mined, that's it. They could offer alternative solutions for the electricity consumptions for bitcoin mining, there are lots of renewable energy like solar and wind. It doesn't have to come to and end where bitcoin mining is banned.
It is just another thing to bring crypto down. There are already lot switching to solar. Yeah I am not saying it is not wasting electricity but it is blown way out of proportion. A lot of things which is already damaging environment for years are completely ignored but politicians are after crypto as it directly loosen thier control on money and hence people.
The fuds have always been there but that has not deterred bitcoin from achieving its goals of providing an alternative to the fiat currency and the government is aware of this fact, banning prove work mining is more or less an attack on decentralized mining and a way to tax bitcoin miners which will push them to relocate. To move bitcoin from PoW to PoS isn't a government decision, and someday they will understand that. The bitcoin community needs to agree on that decision for it to happen and that will be hard to see because the miners will not agree with that.
It would be easier to see a new coin coming with the goal to substitute bitcoin than move BTC to PoS.
Right the government have no control on Bitcoin proof of work operation so at that their can't change it and no one can change it either that is how rigid the Bitcoin security network is. Even if the Bitcoin network agrees on that it can't still be changed as they don't have direct control over Bitcoin. It would be easier to see a new coin coming with the goal to substitute bitcoin than move BTC to PoS.
To move bitcoin from PoW to PoS isn't a government decision, and someday they will understand that. The bitcoin community needs to agree on that decision for it to happen and that will be hard to see because the miners will not agree with that.
It would be easier to see a new coin coming with the goal to substitute bitcoin than move BTC to PoS.
It would be easier to see a new coin coming with the goal to substitute bitcoin than move BTC to PoS.
It is just another thing to bring crypto down. There are already lot switching to solar. Yeah I am not saying it is not wasting electricity but it is blown way out of proportion. A lot of things which is already damaging environment for years are completely ignored but politicians are after crypto as it directly loosen thier control on money and hence people.
I believe truly Bitcoin energy consumption and environmental hazard have been blown out of proportion because a lot of other activities consume more energy and have a more negative impact on the environment than Bitcoin. But the mainstream media have painted Bitcoin with the worst assumptions.
Yup, Bitcoin mining definitely consumes energy and produces a certain amount of emissions. But compared to other heavy industries, bitcoin's energy consumption and emissions are negligible.
The mainstream media is the voice of the government so it is not surprising that those newspapers are constantly attacking bitcoin mining.
Whoever has the media wins, that's how government works.
The question is, can they ban Bitcoin? Because based on what I have heard from various countries plus my country. The more the National Governments tried to ban Bitcoin the more the youths used it. So to what extent can they ban the currency. Instead of trying to ban it let them bring a policy that can regulate the usage of the currency so the users can pay tax to the government. Planning to ban crypto currency is like planning to stop Lion from eating it prey.
No Country can control the use of Bitcoin, it is not physical for a country to regulate the currency.
But I also think of it from the exchange rate.. I also think of it that the price of Bitcoin is too high with that most Countries are afraid that Bitcoin will kill the fiat currency. UK is trying to stop the Companies that are promoting Bitcoin assets, and if any company what to deal on Bitcoin must register with Apex financial institution in the country. But what of the online transactions, can they control it?
Well various cryptocurrency bans in some countries have led to so many changes in the operation of Bitcoin development, UE may have will not have the best time with this banning of Bitcoin mining have reflected on their stand on decentralized currencies. No Country can control the use of Bitcoin, it is not physical for a country to regulate the currency.
But I also think of it from the exchange rate.. I also think of it that the price of Bitcoin is too high with that most Countries are afraid that Bitcoin will kill the fiat currency. UK is trying to stop the Companies that are promoting Bitcoin assets, and if any company what to deal on Bitcoin must register with Apex financial institution in the country. But what of the online transactions, can they control it?
The question is, can they ban Bitcoin? Because based on what I have heard from various countries plus my country. The more the National Governments tried to ban Bitcoin the more the youths used it. So to what extent can they ban the currency. Instead of trying to ban it let them bring a policy that can regulate the usage of the currency so the users can pay tax to the government. Planning to ban crypto currency is like planning to stop Lion from eating it prey.
No Country can control the use of Bitcoin, it is not physical for a country to regulate the currency.
But I also think of it from the exchange rate.. I also think of it that the price of Bitcoin is too high with that most Countries are afraid that Bitcoin will kill the fiat currency. UK is trying to stop the Companies that are promoting Bitcoin assets, and if any company what to deal on Bitcoin must register with Apex financial institution in the country. But what of the online transactions, can they control it?
No Country can control the use of Bitcoin, it is not physical for a country to regulate the currency.
But I also think of it from the exchange rate.. I also think of it that the price of Bitcoin is too high with that most Countries are afraid that Bitcoin will kill the fiat currency. UK is trying to stop the Companies that are promoting Bitcoin assets, and if any company what to deal on Bitcoin must register with Apex financial institution in the country. But what of the online transactions, can they control it?
Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations
Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked. There must be some truth in the environmental impact of Bitcoin. Nobody should be denying that. Bitcoin eats up a lot of energy. That is also true. But by emphasizing Bitcoin, it seems the critics and so called environmental advocates are pointing their fingers only at Bitcoin. Why is that? Why is Bitcoin being singled out when the environment is currently destroyed by so many human activities, most of them unnecessary? These Bitcoin critics are obviously biased against Bitcoin. Bitcoin's contribution to global warming is much lower than fiat's.
Yes, bias is a problem, but every side just denying the other also doesn't help.
The EU already mostly banned incandescent light bulbs. In that case, it seems easier to check whether it's reasonable. With PoW, the problem ist, that there is controversy about its usefulness. Naturally, the EU would have a hard time not looking at the situation unbiased because it runs the ECB that competes with some of the functionality PoW can be used for.
I agree. That's going to be a big problem if every side is biased. They won't be arriving at the best deal. They won't reach at an objective perspective. But to be fair I think I am not seeing this tendency. In the first place there is the removal of the portion which would have meant a de facto ban on Bitcoin. On the other hand there was also the initiative of Bitcoin miners to shift to the use of green energy despite sticking to POW because of its necessity.
I believe that this news and rumors about PoW mining ban was just another speculation in an attempt to lower the price, it was another FUD that the crypto industry is so fond of spreading. After so many introductions, industry developments, cryptomats, regulatory developments, and taxation, it would be extremely stupid and unprofitable to ban bitcoin as the most important PoW asset. Banning bitcoin means banning the entire crypto industry in a given region, because the rest of the market is closely correlated with bitcoin, and such drastic measures would severely damage the crypto industry as a whole. All these rumors and speculations about bitcoin mining have already badly damaged the crypto market.
It wasn't rumors, it was a real vote they had. And they are going to try it again unless people are ready to defend the right for innovations that uses electricity.
I meant was FUD and speculation. Yes, they voted against it, but where is the guarantee that it wasn't deliberately planned in advance to sow panic in the market? They won't try anything because it would be a huge blow to the bitcoin industry, it would be the second China and bitcoin would easily lose another 50% of its value.
In this case, such a move is a good lever for speculation in the cryptocurrency market, this speculation has already shown itself well, ever since the issues of green bitcoin mining and the use of green energy began to be discussed.
I believe that this news and rumors about PoW mining ban was just another speculation in an attempt to lower the price, it was another FUD that the crypto industry is so fond of spreading. After so many introductions, industry developments, cryptomats, regulatory developments, and taxation, it would be extremely stupid and unprofitable to ban bitcoin as the most important PoW asset. Banning bitcoin means banning the entire crypto industry in a given region, because the rest of the market is closely correlated with bitcoin, and such drastic measures would severely damage the crypto industry as a whole. All these rumors and speculations about bitcoin mining have already badly damaged the crypto market.
It wasn't rumors, it was a real vote they had. And they are going to try it again unless people are ready to defend the right for innovations that uses electricity.
I believe that this news and rumors about PoW mining ban was just another speculation in an attempt to lower the price, it was another FUD that the crypto industry is so fond of spreading. After so many introductions, industry developments, cryptomats, regulatory developments, and taxation, it would be extremely stupid and unprofitable to ban bitcoin as the most important PoW asset. Banning bitcoin means banning the entire crypto industry in a given region, because the rest of the market is closely correlated with bitcoin, and such drastic measures would severely damage the crypto industry as a whole. All these rumors and speculations about bitcoin mining have already badly damaged the crypto market.
EU should focus on making electricity creation more green and not on banning new innotavations which uses electricity. We have edless energy available in this world so the important thing is how do we produce it to electricity. Not if we are going to use energy for future innovations or not. We already know 100% sure that energy consumption is only growing around the world so all the focus please to providing green energy. Ban the coal etc if you need to ban something. But don't even think about trying to ban innovation because that does not simply work.
Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations
Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked. There must be some truth in the environmental impact of Bitcoin. Nobody should be denying that. Bitcoin eats up a lot of energy. That is also true. But by emphasizing Bitcoin, it seems the critics and so called environmental advocates are pointing their fingers only at Bitcoin. Why is that? Why is Bitcoin being singled out when the environment is currently destroyed by so many human activities, most of them unnecessary? These Bitcoin critics are obviously biased against Bitcoin. Bitcoin's contribution to global warming is much lower than fiat's.
Yes, bias is a problem, but every side just denying the other also doesn't help.
The EU already mostly banned incandescent light bulbs. In that case, it seems easier to check whether it's reasonable. With PoW, the problem ist, that there is controversy about its usefulness. Naturally, the EU would have a hard time not looking at the situation unbiased because it runs the ECB that competes with some of the functionality PoW can be used for.
I believe truly Bitcoin energy consumption and environmental hazard have been blown out of proportion because a lot of other activities consume more energy and have a more negative impact on the environment than Bitcoin. But the mainstream media have painted Bitcoin with the worst assumptions.
There must be some truth in the environmental impact of Bitcoin.
Of course and there's carbon footprint, no one's denying that. Everything's environmentally damaging nowadays, but yet the chancellors dislike only Bitcoin. I deny the validity of this argument to end up on banning PoW. Nobody pays attention to the environmental impact of the money they daily use, but they'll unarguably consider Bitcoin the most damaging. Well, that's the results of propaganda. Not to mention that is utter nonsense to forbid the calculation of mathematical functions.
Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations
Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked. There must be some truth in the environmental impact of Bitcoin. Nobody should be denying that. Bitcoin eats up a lot of energy. That is also true. But by emphasizing Bitcoin, it seems the critics and so called environmental advocates are pointing their fingers only at Bitcoin. Why is that? Why is Bitcoin being singled out when the environment is currently destroyed by so many human activities, most of them unnecessary? These Bitcoin critics are obviously biased against Bitcoin. Bitcoin's contribution to global warming is much lower than fiat's.
It's greats that the ban was not passed, would be a slap in the face to those who have always been prejudiced against bitcoin.
Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations
Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked. There must be some truth in the environmental impact of Bitcoin. Nobody should be denying that. Bitcoin eats up a lot of energy. That is also true. But by emphasizing Bitcoin, it seems the critics and so called environmental advocates are pointing their fingers only at Bitcoin. Why is that? Why is Bitcoin being singled out when the environment is currently destroyed by so many human activities, most of them unnecessary? These Bitcoin critics are obviously biased against Bitcoin. Bitcoin's contribution to global warming is much lower than fiat's.
Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations
Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked. Jump to: