Topic: GREENPEACE INTENSIFIES CAMPAIGN AGAINST BITCOIN FOLLOWING ETHEREUM'S MERGE - page 4. (Read 884 times)

In any case their plans to move to another algorithm that would give them free profit for the premined 72 million tokens they hold was there from the start. The definition of their shitcoin inside United States might have only acted as an additional incentive not the cause.

---

P.S. They're saying on reddit that hippies at greenpeace have received $5 million bribe to spread the FUD about bitcoin. Ripple paid the bribe! https://redd.it/xgkp0z

It's more like propaganda, we've been used to this campaign and accusations against bitcoin. Those known people tell that bitcoin consumes that much energy and it should be alternative and green energy that must be used. Even before they tell us that the miners have been doing that, at least not the majority but we can be specific to them that they're already into green energy. Whoever is behind these campaigns is really hitting their business and the fault is bitcoin, so, this is one of their way of pushing people away into bitcoin.

ethereum was not classed as a commodity yesterday either

ethereum has been thought of as a commodity since its inception, and the CFTC has been poking at ethereum for years
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/cftc-says-cryptocurrency-ether-is-a-commodity-and-is-open-to-ether-derivatives-133455545.html
(2019)

bitcoin supporters lobbied against this. which is where instead of CFTC , the SEC stepped in. treating bitcoin as a asset. not commodity.. but this year SEC wants to step out and hand the work over to CFTC

the point of etherem was to be a network used to create other tokens(on sidechains/subnets) ..
yep a commodity is a raw material used to create other products.
ethereum were happy as a commodity


the attempts to postpone it were not from the regulated exchanges.. it was from the users that were not regulated. and those who were regulated but wanted a safe transition

..
but in short. with bitcoin not being a commodity in US legal recognised jurisdiction..CFTC does not apply.. thus CFTC regulators cannot push exchanges to push developers to shift to PoS due to things that the CFTC impose on exchanges else risk having to delist crypto's that dont fir CFTC acceptable parameters

however if bitcoin is recognised as a commodity.. CFTC regulation powers can apply(production quota's, environmental inspections.. think of all the things that agri-farmers have to obide by and limit their ability to operate/grow.. yep that CFTC stuff)

and yes for assets.. there is a regulatory reason why many exchanges do not accept LN/liquid/monero due to those being redflag currencies according to FATF/SEC under their jurisdiction of currency/asset

---

dont worry about the greenpace sideshow stage drama.. thats just the distraction finger point to "dont look at gov, blame greenpeace" and distract people away from whats really happening..
the SEC is trying to shift bitcoin out of SEC jurisdiction and into CFTC jurisdiction this year... ethereum was in CFTCjurisdiction for years

understand the implications of this jurisdictional shift

---

i tried to dumb things down and not go full wall of text.. but the important thing is

if explaining more complexities as short as possible

the EPA has ultimate environmental impact powers.
the EPA has not much power or sway of things in SEC remit. but it has alot more of a relationship and power to get involved in the CFTC remit

crypto(generally) is just currecny
top regulator (FATF) finactional action task force
sub class regulators
asset/security based crypto (SEC) securities exchange commission

commodity based cryto (CFTC) commodity futures trade commission

Don't be naive, it has nothing to do with the environtment, they are attacking bitcoin because bankers are greenpeace donors.

I disagree because the plan to leave PoW behind wasn't created yesterday in this shitcoin. In fact from the early days that it was released the "difficulty bomb" was part of the ETH protocol that ensured PoW doesn't remain the protocol forever.
It's just that ethereum developers were too incompetent to finish the code to make the switch so it took a long time needing multiple hard forks to postpone the "difficulty bomb" many times.

All this BS will basically turn into a meme at this point.
Environmentalists to the Bitcoin miners: USE GREEN ENERGY!
The Bitcoin miners: Starts using more green energy.
Environmentalists to the Bitcoin miners: DON'T USE ENERGY! YOU ARE WASTING EHERGY!
Bitcoin miners: But we are using green energy now.
I don't know how to continue this meme/joke. Maybe someone, who is smarter than me would write a punchline at the end.
In summary: We can't do anything to please the anti-Bitcoiners. Haters gonna hate, it doesn't matter what you do.

for those that want to learn about risk awareness of change..
read this part i wrote in another part of the forum
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60957466

the summary is.
as a legally recognised currency (2014+). the FATF regulators then gained a footing into having some jurisdiction over some bitcoin business stuff.
many celebrated "mainstream" but didnt see the consequence (AML/KYC+change to privacy rights when using financial services)

then when defined as a asset currency. the SEC got a foothold, which then had other stipulations

whilst bitcoin is NOT a commodity. the SEC does not have jurisdictional power to impose production quota's or environmental impact limitations.

however the CFTC does have this power.this caused ethereum to push ethereum over to PoS because yes ethereum was classed as a commodity

bitcoin was not a commodity(yet). thus safe from environmental impact regulations. but due to binance chain, liquid and now LN. bitcoin is slowly falling into the commodity category..

so people need to be aware of the legal and jurisdictional implications of allowing bitcoin to be classified and then regulated as a commodity.

If the hippies at Greenpeace were so worried about the environment and are as "international" as they claim to be, they should start protesting against all those people who are starting to burn coal or are currently on a cutting spree to destroy the planet by cutting the trees to turn them into firewoods for the winter, all under their nose.

But of course all the toxic gases that burning coal releases in the very air people breathe is not important for Greenpeace but trying to turn bitcoin into a centralized shitcoin by switching to PoS is! Well dream on hippies...

I was surprised too. They could already campaign against the energy expenditure of traditional banking, but no, which makes me think that they are more in cahoots with the powers that be than they like to pretend.

The bad thing about this is that with the climate sensitivity around the world, the message that Bitcoin is a threat to the environment is getting through.

Surprised to see that it was Greenpeace. Another agenda to spread and they should even focus more on other things than this. Oh well, they are again into PoW thing that consumes energy. They don't get it, they should campaign against those factories that are spreading their leaked oil in the rivers and not with these machines that can be run with the alternative energy for the miners that own farms of it.

This is a way to promote themselves. Majority of the people don't know about this, so called Greenpeace. With a single statement they're known around the world. With a much easier way they've done a promotion. Apart from that, everyone have got their right to reveal their thoughts and the rest is with the majority of the people whether to accept it or not.

you mean the same people that wanted to take photos of clmate change of how icebergs are being broken.. by sailing in a icebreaker ship.

oh the guys that printed a billion paper leaflets to campaign about deforrestation

Greenpeace? Aren't they the idiots who were protesting against oil drilling platforms by sailing around one of such platforms in a boat powered by a diesel engine?
Reminds me of that video where so called animal lovers chained themselves to a conveyor belt in a meat processing plant and then panicked when the belt begun to move choking them...
The world would be better without them.

I'd say it is what it is, whilst a lot of energy is consumed in mining Bitcoin, i don't think it is at the level the government and anti-Bitcoin people are placing it at, you can prolly talk about other things that affect the enviroment, but that wouldn't even be an argument in favor of Bitcoin, as you cannot say that because one thing is destructive, then adding another one isn't bad, but then that takes us back to the initial argument, and that is: Bitcoin isn't even close to being destructive to the enviroment.

Having said that, the Bitcoin network/technology is a net positive for the society, for obvious reasons actually. I'd say there are tons of things to blame for enviromental destruction and Bitcoin would hardly make the list, yes Bitcoin mining uses a lot of energy no doubt, but definitely not at the level of it being enviromentally destructive as some of these propagandas make it seem, and definitely changing from pow to pos is extremely improbable.

If it is really possible to stop climate change by banning bitcoin mining or converting bitcoin to POS however they want, I would agree with them. But it's clear that climate change is caused by a lot of pressure from hundreds of different industries, bitcoin is not the only cause of climate change. Many people think that other industries create use value so emissions are acceptable, but so does bitcoin, it doesn't give them value but it gives value to millions of other people. Therefore, this can be considered a conservative, incorrect argument. This is yet another excuse for bitcoin haters to take advantage of mining to put pressure on bitcoin.

Like I said, an echo chamber.

Most Bitcoiners reach a point where they begin using alternative energy to mine.  I personally wouldn't have a 12kWh solar system if it weren't for Bitcoin.  Now with them using Bitcoin mining to cut down on wasted natural gas, you can even make the argument that Bitcoin mining is a positive for the environment.  Sure, it's still a net negative, but making progress.  When you consider the industries that Bitcoin is attempting to replace, there is a chance it ends up being a net positive for the environment.  We just aren't there yet because people will always chase profits over doing what's right.  You can only hope at some point a majority of Bitcoiners are so rich that they prioritize the planet over their pockets.

Its not just greenpeace. Basically anyone who knows how much power is wasted by mining btc would agree. This forum is a bit of an echo chamber though so doubt my option will hold much sway.

lets get real. and understand the risks..
not for Fud or horror or scare tactics but about thinking of the weaknesses to be better prepared

the 2017 saga did not prove "bitcoin strong" it proved the opposite.

the cartel of the DCG did implement a upgrade without high true consensus.. yep they mandated an activation using a couple tactics of a NY agreement of economic nodes(exchanges/main merchants) and code(UAHF(yes it was H not S)

governments can use regulation on bitcoin businesses to push a NY agreement style on the merchants/exchanges to do a UAHF (H pretending to be S) on a mandated date and get github to only keep the bitcoin repo account online if it obides to only code a PoS upgrade. whereby the main devs of core who are employees of 3 DCG child companies, brinks, chaincodelabs and blockstream are then pushed to code it.

yep the exact tactic of the mandated activation of segwit can be used again to mandate a PoS. where all the merchant services and exchanges would only be(via regulation) allowed to accept and service customers of btc if the chain is PoS (regulators already tell exchanges not to service monero/liquid/ln)

so it is a possible risk. and we need to be aware.. not stroked to sleep to pretend people dont have to do anything and everything will be fine.. much like told to do nothing in 2017 because the mandate would be fine

Ex-lead maintainer of core (Wlad) left recently. and he is right.. bitcoin needs to become less centralised. because there are central points of failure as 2017 proved

What's new? These attacks aren't new for Bitcoin. But still, Bitcoin stands strong. It's not possible to move Bitcoin from PoW to PoS. Bitcoin isn't like Ethereum. Because Ethereum has a team who are deciding things and controlling everything as well. But Bitcoin doesn't have a team and miners have to decide. Do you think miners will ever support PoS? I don't think so since they are going to affect it in the first place. Just forget about technical things or how secure PoW is. Miners will never support PoS for Bitcoin.