Topic: GREENPEACE INTENSIFIES CAMPAIGN AGAINST BITCOIN FOLLOWING ETHEREUM'S MERGE (Read 892 times)

I didn't say it's humans' fault. I just said the obvious: Climate is changing.

Climate changes all the time, but it's not caused by humans:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/03/16/climate-variations-analyzed-5-million-years-back-in-time-show-repeating-fractal-patterns/
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2016/03/16/climate-repeats-as-fractals-say-researchers/
https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

The planet also gets greener, since CO2 is plant's food:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2019/02/28/nasa-says-earth-is-greener-today-than-20-years-ago-thanks-to-china-india/#45d066636e13

Nobody talks about this:

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/planting-1-2-trillion-trees-could-cancel-out-a-decade-of-co2-emissions-scientists-find

Man-made climate change is pseudo-science/new age religion.

Believe in Greta you infidels, or else you will rot in Hell!

Protestants are the worst when it comes to guilt complex, always the same BS.

Don't worry though, the elites will fly in private jets thanks to your carbon credits.

Except that I just sent you some. You can check the citations from Wikipedia as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change

Except that there's an immeasurably amount of evidence that proves the Earth isn't flat, while there's no such evidence that the climate isn't changing.

The evidence demonstrates it.

Stop twisting my words and look on the evidence.

There.

It's not a matter of opinions. It's a matter of facts.

I see you are posting news articles in this sub-forum and not for the first time. I think if you posted them in the press subforum, you would be helping everyone out by making those articles easy to find and they would be able to attribute your contribution to your name easier. Here is the board that I mentioned: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=77.0

Please be sure to read through the board guidelines there and use the correct formats to post your news article. (Although be sure to check if someone has already posted your news already. We don't need 10 people posting the same news here)

Have fun on Bitcointalk! Thanks for keeping the community updated!

no one can predict accurately the exact moment it will rain because of wind patterns and such.. but

if you know summer of 2021 had exceedingly high temperatures it = extra evaporation of water. that goes into the sky.. and what goes up.. must come down.. its simple physics

no one can predict exact date WHEN but if you know X billions of gallons are in the sky = Xbillions to fall out the sky

however if this years temperatures were not as hot it = 0.Xbillion gallons of water in the sky = 0.X litres to fall.

no one can know when. but maths is easy to know amount..

if the right conditions apply like a windy end of summer. that wind blows vapour together to combine to create larger droplets which become white puffy clouds. and if wind remains strong they combine and make bigger droplets to make dark grey clods

other factors like if when evaporating they reach the upper atmosphere they cool into ice droplets which if slammed together by wind can form sleet, snow or hail

too man y factors to accurate predict on the daily. but over the course of 3-6 months they can predict the odds of things happening but just not when.

..
oh and for the whole "climaate change" debade
its not carbon.. its actually the water cycle that affects temperatures more
notice hw 2 days of bot equal earth tilt towards the sun = equal rays of light on both days, differ.. even though carbon lingers around for moneths-decades..
thus carbon change on the daily is not affecting the daily

but water.. that can change temperatures by MULTIPLE degree's fast.
and here is the human caused effect

instead of letter rainfall run down streams, rivers and soak into neighbouring land to cool the soil and allow easy evaporation to complete the water cycle. most water ends up in vast reservoirs which are harder to evaporat a gallon of water compared to it being spread out on land as a think layer
then its pumoted into pipes thus not having much exposure to the sun. also when it does rain instead of rain soaking into fields.. it hits concrete streets and pushed into drains. thus again less sun exposure to evaporate.. and then its all pushed out to the sea..

thus compared to 1850.. far far les rain reaces open soil land to evaporate to make more rain..

the rain forest.. emphasis RAIN forest is important to climate.. but not due to carbon.. but RAIN.. hint is in the name
each leaf of a tree is like a small frying pan. it holds droplets of water and as the sun hits the leaves, it heats the water causing evaporation and that evaporation takes the heat away keeping the leaf and the air surrounding it cooler. (much like how human sweat cools people)

I’m not so sure this message is getting through. We’re debunking all this lies about BTC and the “climate change” religion. Mass media, governments and their footmen corporations are losing this match. They just are a one-way loudspeaker. You cannot hear what the listeners are saying on the other side of their screens. But we, the common people do. And what are they saying? This is BS.

Just yesterday I was surprised at lunch time at work, when a guy that I would have never thought he was holding such opinion said that... this is all BS. Some guys were talking about news that this autumn is expected to be really hot and dry, and he just said, “how would they know if they cannot even forecast the weather tomorrow? We know. Everybody knows they cannot forecast accurately the weather one day in advance, and they are pretending to know what is going to happen next three months? Give me a break!

So no, the message is not getting through. We’re many, and we’re doing quite a good job when it comes to debunking all these interested liars.


No, the fact that governments can weaponize people based on the climate change religion does not prove there's no climate change. That's why I have never said that. What demonstrates it is not real is the rest of my comment that you, obviously, did not read. There is not data to prove climate change. Having you playing stunts with my arguments does not prove yours is right.  

One person, you, or many people saying there is such a “climate change” does not prove there is such change as having everybody saying the Earth is flat, as it already happened along history. A fact does not depend on how many people believes it to be true or false. I do not need to prove it to be false. You, whoever is saying it is true, need to demonstrate it is. Saying, “look, the other day I saw images of a draught, or a flood" does not prove it. Or "oh, look, there’s hurricanes!” And there are a lot more than ever!” Says who? Where is the data to prove your statement? You need to come along with data that demonstrates there is a real change respecting the millions of years the Earth has been turning on. You have no data. No data? No proof. No proof? Climate change does not exist. This is call scientific method. You lack it.
 
Do you believe it does? Some people believe in God. I do not discuss people’s beliefs. Everyone has the right to his own religion. Climate change is a religion. Take it for what it is.

Jokes aside the effects of a lie told by a "legitimate" face is a lot more effective than the same lie told a thousand times by a thousand trolls. This is why the bullshit Elon Musk spreads against bitcoin spreads more than the same bullshit idiots on bitcointalk, reddit or elsewhere spread.

Not to mention their wider audience. You may suddenly see an idiot in the parliament somewhere referring to such reports as their source of "reliable" information and make decisions that way. Nobody is going to take a trolls post on a forum seriously though.

at minimum wage of $10 an hour for 40 hours a week = $5k a person for 3month usual campaign length

its only 1000 trolls for 3 months

i guess ripple couldnt find its own 1000 idiot army of altcoin supporters

as for what greenpeace is saying. that part is social drama.. its the petition part to government that has more implications

especially if you read the exaggerations of the report that us governments own "experts" have pushed to the decisions makers
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60985112

in short bitcoin uses only 36-57TWH/year using fair efficient asics of the last few years at the years actual hashrate calculation of the network of 192exa average.

 instead of the exaggerated BS numbers oin the report based on older outdated asics of 4-5 years ago and pretending the hashrate was at a constant state of its ATH 230exa constantlt all year long(facepalm)

Oh don't worry about that, I'm being paid exactly $0 to deploy an anti-FUD gun.  

The problem with ignoring those spreading misinformation is that you won't see it anymore to correct it for everyone else who is also reading this forum. If we don't do that, we suddenly see after years that people still believe in the FUD like those who still think SegWit removes signatures from transactions!

What you shouldn't do is prolong the conversation with users like LegendaryK since at this point I'm convinced he is either trolling or getting paid to spread FUD. In which case I'm wondering how much they're paying him, hopefully he is doing it for $20 since the rate is $5 million these days

LegendaryKnob would be permabanned in another forum...

You forgot the blockchain technology of these cryptocurrencies and comparing with existing fiat monetary system which is completely under control of single authority called Central banks.

PoS is not really that bad but ethereum is not actually competing with bitcoin in my opinion, it is trying to up the transaction processing speed since the rivals of ETH like BSC, Tron and others are way ahead and lot cheaper than ethereum for long time.

Riot explains it well.

https://youtu.be/JM1L3Lobdsk

Just press the "Ignore" button, there's a reason why this topic is not called "LegendaryK INTENSIFIES CAMPAIGN AGAINST BITCOIN FOLLOWING ETHEREUM MERGE".

Why do you only reply to the little side note I posted in the end and not to the thorough argumentation above it? This selective reading / replying (that is a pattern with you, I noticed) is not very convincing.
And do you have any other arguments than 'They will ban it! Every PoW supporter is an idiot!'?

We're in Bitcoin Discussion!

You're utterly incompetent for dialogue, and that's seriously unfavorable for you. There's no damn way you'll ever move on with life if you keep offending your interlocutors in this manner. Despite being explained to you numerous times that Proof-of-Work comes with benefits that are otherwise impossible to gain, I've concluded that you don't even care about that energy you're constantly whining about, at all.

It's just that decentralized, self-authenticating, unstoppable form of money doesn't meet your ideals. Your perpetual appealing to authority proves it. You don't like us, nor do you accept our arguments as valid, because authorities are number #1 priority for you. Evidence's secondary. You're attacking, because we're justifiably an enemy for you.

You're a psychologically concerning, weak person.

Speaking of bans, aren't you evading yours? 

atleast they admit that the problem is their "fragile infrastructure.." but Leg-endK needs to realise what that actually means..
yep power companies took peoples money for decades but didnt use that received money to strengthen the infrastructure

they should actually be campaigning to stop power companies from profiteering and actually invest the money in upgrades

rather then tell neighbours to turn off the lights because they dont like the neighbours using power a selfish person wants.

silly thing is
when one neighbours cries about how much another neighbour makes noise and uses electric and wants to tell the neighbour to turn off the lights and sit in silence... that neighbour restricted neighbour then cries about the first one who is now using electric and making more noise..  
social drama echoechamber of fighting in the suburb between neighbours rather than actually getting power companies to stop profiting off of people while not investing in supplying the services all people want

power companies want power uses to blame each other..
yep look at the fossil debate..
blame power users not the power company burning the fossil fuel

---

power companies knew over 50 years ago they only had 80 years of fossil reserves left in the ground.. the 2050 date of climate change is significant. because it just so happens to be when fossil fuels run out anyway..
but instead of investing in renewables in the 1980;s they instead funded the US DoD to go to war in the middle east to get at their fossil reserves. to keep fossil industry running.
instead of transitioning and upgrading to renewables. they instead started to blame citizens and people for using plastics and pumping out exhaust fumes out of their cars..
it is all finger pointing by energy produces to shift the blame to people who should fight amungst themselves for using so much and having lame excuses to then charge those users more higher prices.. while still those companies didnt invest in renewables..

normal people do not buiild power plants they pay power companies to cover costs to build power plants.. the problem .. the power companies didnt build power plants.. .. and now they want to blame people for using energy so that it becomes the tax payers burden to give government grants to power companies to be pushed into upgrading.. pfft..

leg-end is pointing his fingers at the wrong people


oh and here is the climax..

asic farms produce no greenhouse gas.. they have no chimney. they have no coal or oil on the facility. no furnace

.. now look were the greenhouse gas actually comes from when energy is produced..
yep..
power plants create greenhouse gas.. not asic farms

i can guarantee you this Leg-end
stand anywhere near a asic mining farm. your lungs will not inhale plumes of carbon
you will not be coughing due to co2 . you wont have that smell in the air of soot


your summer time barbecue of just your one household, emits more smoke than an asic farm does

so point your cries at the actual emitters.. the power stations.
you know the people you pay your bills to with the hope and dream that your electric bill is suppose to pay for your electric by that money being supposedly used to pay for costs of maintenance and upgrades of their power generation facilities. which for as long as you have lived has not been used to make your power utility source go greener.

No , I am linking to what the Authorities are saying they are going to do,
which is ban PoW, because the btc cultist are too stupid to fix the energy waste.

PoW supporters continued stupidly on the mater is what I find insulting.

What is really amazing is how all PoW supporters are just utter morons.

Oh well , your PoW coin waste energy , and you PoW morons waste everyone else time with your stupidity.

You have wasted enough of my time.

Enjoy the 2024 permaban on PoW.  

Last I checked, insults are a pretty weak argument - yet again, nothing of substance.
That's why they say more about whoever uses them instead of whoever was targeted.

If Texas were to actually sell all their electricity to Bitcoin miners and to take it away from people even if that means they die - are you honestly blaming the miners instead of the state?
Now, I don't know whether Texas is willing to do that, I can't judge how likely that is.

Here's a point with thesis and argumentation, maybe you can learn something from this methodology.
Proposition: There is economic reason why starvation in Texas will never happen.
Argumentation: Do keep in mind miners need the cheapest energy they can get. If people are in dire need of electricity, they will pay prices that miners can't afford to pay.
Proof: You can easily compare it to Europe, where miners are basically 'forced out' of the market by consumers, who pay upwards of $0.30 per kWh -- a price that no mining operation can work with. At such prices, they shut down their gear temporarily until prices drop again, or relocate to a cheaper location.

You're again appealing to authority; if instead you meant to propose their argument as a good one, it's really not. Bitcoin mining is already much greener than the industry average and highly incentivized (financially) to continue in that direction, since mining profits are directly correlated with energy costs and renewables are so cheap.

So when those ~7 million people die from the 2024 Texas grid collapse,
You want to be the one to tell them, your greed and cult faith in PoW is why their loved ones had to die.

---

Dude,
just go outside, you have become too stupid to talk too.

So sad.

---

https://decrypt.co/109283/white-house-bitcoin-mining-greener-ban
Time is short.

4 pools does not mean 4 warehouses


oh and the "unknown" slice of the pie chart..
https://www.blockchain.com/charts/pools
is not a single pool called "unknown"
its many pools which blockchain.info cannot identify so just clumps the numbers together into one slice

and if you delve into the depths of data/statistics of each pool you would learn that the pool services thousands of users around the world. not one location

The way I see it, this "legEND" is never getting a legendary rank in here.

I always find it amazing how some people develop this socialist mentality that makes them think they can limit people's access to some goods and services "for the good of others". He uses words like leeches and parasites, because in his mind it's one apple for each person. You can't go to the market and buy out all apples, if you do it means the system is broken to allow that and you're a parasite.

It's the same with power grid, he lacks the basic understanding of how electricity works. Each power company calculates the amount they can sell. If I decide to set up a mininng operation, I have to write to them and ask if it's possible that I get a certain amount like 100kW for that. If they can spare it, they'll set me up with everything needed to support such draw.
You cannot steal 100kW just like that. You can't put miners anywhere you like. If you do it without thinking you'll trip your breakers first and if you decide to put in bigger ones you'll fru the connection between your house and the nearest HV transformer.

A mining operation cannot cause blackouts. It's up to the power company to limit power to certain businesses if they are unable to provide a constant and stable supply. They will rather stop supplying miners than hospitals if it comes to that and no mining ban is needed for that to happen. The market will always regulate itself and power companies are free to choose how much power they can send to a location.

LegendaryK, you should stop trying to put yourself between the seller and the buyer. You social justice warriors always try to interfere in the market and put your hands in other people's pockets in the name of equality and ecology.

Geez, you are another slow one.
The world power grids are not , I repeat not interconnected , no grid has access to the entire world's total energy output,
Currently your btc PoW mining parasites are trying to suck an additional amount out of Texas grid that is equal to New York State energy use.
Texas grid produces less than 1% of the World Total energy.
PoW will be banned or the Texas grid will collapse by 2024 and kill millions of people in the 2-5 years it takes to repair.



Dude,
they don't hold water for you , because you are stupid.  
Don't worry , after the PoW Permaban, you can just play with your crayons all day.



1.  Too many ASIC Warehouses PoW parasites are trying to be on 1 grid.
2.  4 mining pool operators are not decentralized
3.  Proof of Waste will be banned.

What I have learned Franky1 is you are now as dumb as doomad.  
Sad day for you.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-26/texas-crypto-rush-may-need-as-much-power-as-entire-state-of-n-y?leadSource=uverify%20wall

https://www.change.org/p/no-to-riot-bitcoin-mine-in-navarro-county

idiot thinks bitcoin causes rolling blackouts..
i think that Leg-endK things that all bitcoin miners of a pool are housed in one building like an amazon AWS server farm

sorry Leg-end. but a pool is just a data manager single server, that receives data from miners all across the world.. its a little thing called decentralisation

there are not 3-10 locations of mining. there are tens of thousands of locations

the ~1.5m-2m asics are not located in just a half dozen locations putting high pressure on a single power plant that circuit breaks every day..

get real learn something

---

rolling blackouts are the failure of government and power stations.. not the people that use electric and pay their bills

here's the reasons
imagine a region has a 240GW capacity and a 150 average demand

1. when they insert solar and show that they can achieve a yearly 240GW capacity
politicians say "turn off the 240GW fossil, we are good to go green"
but this 240GW capacity is not evenly spread as 10gw per hour(same hour of each day totalled for year)
its actually 30GW an hour for the 8 hours of sunlight
meaning they have problems when its not daytime as they no longer have support from fossil at the end of the day

2. with hydro (lets use same numbers)
that too is not evenly spaced out as 60GW per season..
its actually more like 120 for winter 100 for autumn and 10 each for spring and summer

3. lets take california and the colorado river.. the silly people in the energy/water market have a "magic number2 of water capacity and then allot quota's of water to go to certain counties..
the thing is the magic number is higher than the actual amount of water available. and also those at the top of the river ensure they get their quota because if they dont use it they lose it.
meaning those at the bottom dont get any. meaning the dam reservoirs do not fill thus energy production doesnt meet capacity. and in summer where there is not much rain and alot of evaporation. energy generations really slows down

this is not about blame the energy user. its about knowing the facts that for decades the utility companies have been over exaggerating their numbers to get money but not investing in expanding and staying within their capacity..

dont blame energy users.. its not their fault they pay for a service they cannot get.. blame the energy provisors who have for decades been on a mis-spending spree of their profits and not investing into meeting demand. and now the politicians want to turn off fossil fuel plants.. that mis-spending and exaggerations of capacity are beginning to show

The reason we're 'overreacting' is that they are being deceitful.
Spending this kind of money on anti-Bitcoin campaigns is one of the worst ways I can think of to use cash for saving the planet.

I think it's easy to understand that we're not going to be silent if someone is trying to bullshit us into this 'Bitcoin causes global warming' narrative that is a requirement for arguing against PoW.
Since we know better, it is our duty to counter the loud voices that are prevalent in the misinformation-camp of deliberate fraudsters and deceived newbies.

I'm all for fighting global warming, but focusing on Bitcoin is a waste of time and money. It pollutes way too little for any change to its protocols to have an impact and it's moving to renewables due to economics, on its own - faster than almost any other industry.
Anyone claiming otherwise is either unknowingly wasting their time or knowingly deceiving people for whatever motive they're following.

---

'Banning' is relative. Nobody can prevent me mining ETC on a GPU at home or Bitcoin on a stick miner; and it will be barely possible to track. Mining will continue in one way or another.
Making it illegal to use a coin works with any cryptocurrency; it has nothing to do with PoW or not. In fact, coins tend to be banned / restricted by authorities mostly by degree of privacy. This should tell you enough about the real reasons behind attempted BTC / crypto bans.

Do you realize that Bitcoin's energy impact is miniscule compared to global energy footprint?
Just because blackouts happen and Bitcoin mining also happens, doesn't mean causation. Classic fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

Or we could say Bitcoin is the only PoW coin that prevailed. Since PoW is competitive by design, it pushes out weaker competitors. ETH was one of the strongest contenders until recently.

That's interesting! So far, a lot of members in this community, but also people in my real-life ventures, valued my logic abilities. On the other hand, you present arguments riddled of logic fallacies and failed to provide a single one that held water.

 

Those perceived authorities can permaban Proof of Waste Mining.
Those perceived authorities can make it illegal to trade in PoW coins in the US.
Those perceived authorities can have you arrested if you transact in a PoW coin.

Facts such as the rolling blackouts and increasing energy costs and the increased drain on energy resources,
well you make yourself too stupid to recognize the reality you live in, that is on you and has nothing to do with me.

Anyone here with the ability to use logic knows Proof of waste is a dying tech.

None of the BTC cultists have to believe a word I say, none of that will stop PoW from being banned.  

FYI:
Did you run out of crayons, their was no meme in your post, just like their is never any logic in your posts.  

 

Greenpeace is known to be overreacting to things a bit, and they defend behind a good logic to do that. What do they say they want? A better earth that's not killing us, which is amazing right? I mean think about it this way, would you want a world where it is doing a lot better? Everywhere green, the whole world filled with oxygen that you breath to feel better, beaches and forests all amazing? It would all happen and that would be amazing.

But that doesn't mean that you should be overreacting to every little thing and think that you are doing the right thing. I should save money and be rich too, but spending a dollar won't get me there, saving 50% of my salary would. Focus on the top 100 companies that ruin the world, they are the cause of 70% of the pollution, that would be a great start.

You continue argumenting purely based on (perceived) authorities on various subjects.

The 'argumentum ab auctoritate' is one of the weakest arguments in existence, in my opinion. You consistently fail to provide verifiable arguments based on logic and numbers. Nobody will take you seriously here, that way.

Yes, they are the guys who are sailing a gazillion miles in a couple of icebreaker ships to protect the whales... but that is not the real issue. The real issue is this.... The Fiat Banking system are using a lot more energy and polluting the earth more, but they focus on Bitcoin. 

Do you see them standing in front of the 1000s of armored cars that are being powered by large Diesel engines on a daily basis? Do you see them picketing in front of the 1000s of Bank branches, where air-conditioning are running 24/7 ....and also electronic machines like computers / CCTV / Networking equipment / ATMs / Card readers... etc...etc?

They are unnecessarily attacking the POW because they are using energy to mine something useful and which can be used as payment mode so what's the problem in that? The Air conditioning from the other financial sector also disturb the environment as they also emit carbon to the nature but they have never raise a voice against them why? Because it's for government and they know they can't go against them.Miners are also using energy efficient ways or say green resources to mine btc but we always see this drama but it's totally waste and miners will continue the same way moving to more renewable sources and the people will realise what a waste they were part of.

It is important that people realize that a great deal of what they read on the mainstream media has been manipulated in order to create a reaction on them, in this case governments are trying to cloud their judgment and manipulate them into believing that somehow the system implemented by bitcoin is both inefficient and a threat to the environment.

As we know this is not true, but the average person doesn't really have the time or even the interest to try to look for the truth so they are going to believe whatever they are told especially if it comes from an organization like Greenpeace.

Trader University make a video about the subject. Reasonable opinion. It is one of the beautiful things about open source software and consensus. You don't need to ask anyone.

https://odysee.com/@TraderUniversity:a/bitcoin-tells-greenpeace-to-go-fork:3

Be sure and start on your meme for when the executive order from the white house bans PoW.

That should be the funniest one of all.  

Guess you better do a meme for the Office of Science and Technology too.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/white-house-condemns-energy-use-of-mining-bitcoin

Bitcoin cultist are so clueless about what is happening, it is like they can't read, maybe that is why they play with pictures so much.  

https://bitcoincleanup.com/ would be cool!

By the way, if memory serves me correct, this is the person who I made this meme for. They're very worried about the grid.


Also, related.

Thanks for the idea (or rather no thanks because this idea will melt their brain cells). Now I'm going to register an opposite domain and make it point to all the resources that thoroughly debunk that "bitcoin is bad for the environment" argument.

Looks like they are trying anyway.  

https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2021/05/21/greenpeace-stops-accepting-bitcoin-donations-cites-high-energy-use/

At some point everyone realized that it is PoW or them, and then they refuse to use it.
Everyone except bitcoin cultist that are utterly delusional about Proof of Waste.

Many Crypto Users realized that PoW was a dead end starting in 2013 until now.
Greenpeace realize that PoW was a danger in May of 2021,
Texas will realize the PoW danger, when their power grid collapse in 2024.

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/change-the-code-not-the-climate-greenpeace-usa-ewg-others-launch-campaign-to-push-bitcoin-to-reduce-climate-pollution/


https://cleanupbitcoin.com/

They were accepting donations in Bitcoin for years.

No way back from there

What's funny is that ETH fans celebrate the switch to PoS and use this event to demand Bitcoin to do it as well (for various reasons).
Meanwhile we can also interpret it as surrender. They basically surrendered in the fight against Bitcoin; remember 'flippening' and such words thrown around?

They relinquished completely and stepped down to attempt at least becoming the #1 in the children's sandpit of PoS.
Basically, they took the blue pill.

biggest flaw of eth PoS is yes the centralisation.. the custodianisation of the stake

this makes eth PoS now even easier for regulators to get exchanges to pull off more mandated upgrades to ease regulators minds. because its not just the utility of transaction recognition with exchanges.. but also those exchanges are the miners now. so they dont have to threaten miners to flag agreement with economic nodes.. because the economic nodes are the miners

so if they want to only follow a particular fork. USERS with full nodes would even more easily follow exchanges because not only are they the recognised services to spend coins with. but those exchanges now own those users stake and opposing the exchanges means users lose their stake.. thus now for eth a double hit for users that dont want to follow a exchange thats pushed to follow a particular fork

The uselessness and flaws of PoS and how they can be easily overcome by centralization have been evident to all for about a decade. You shouldn't forget that we already have old centralized PoS shitcoins and now we have one more. The fact that ETH is bigger than other shitcoins doesn't mean the algorithm or their centralization is any different.

The only thing that may become evident is very specific bugs related to the mess known as the ethereum protocol that may start showing themselves in the future.

We know Greenpeace was taking money from Ripple for their anti-Bitcoin propaganda campaign. They are not arguing in good faith and are undermining what they're about when they take bribes from those looking to promote their altcoins. Greenpeace used to accept Bitcoin so they are fully aware of it's benefits. They only decided to start caring about the environmental impact when they started receiving millions of dollars to promote proof-of-stake.

How's that? He just told you how he himself mines with renewable energy. How can this be bad for the environment?
It actually appears that the 'echo chamber gang' are the mainstream media and whoever is behind them, trying to push this narrative.

The ultimate goal is not helping the environment, but replacing PoW with PoS which is just fiat in sheep's clothing. It gives the people who are in control in the fiat system, the same amount of control, while PoW doesn't.

no doomad. only a couple of your pals beleive your version of events.. even the core devs admit the real version of events that counter your narrative(get the hint you are not showing loyalism by pushing the 5yo fake story first presented by some devs)

the FLAG of NYA was to get segwit activated .. the actual code level and block data level of changes requested by NYA
(via the mandated crap of rejecting the opposition... data code, and flag statistics show the truth)
the second part.. which was not code. but just social "promise"/"compromise" was a later 2mb block...
the 2mb later promise (no date specified) never flourished

but we all know using common sense and logic that the 2mb part was not the real agenda.. as it was just the ploy/bait to get segwit flagged in via the NYA tactic
 you know it. and though you want to play social drama 3 card shuffle to confuse the matter.. there was a hard fork. so dont go playing it was a softfork (even that image in chart shows the SOFT didnt happen. because the blue-red shows a HARK happened.

anywy

just put your stupid social games aside

point is..
devs acknowledge the tactics of the mandate code and the flag events to break off the opposition to get a (unnatural) 100% which is what data also shows

and the emphasise is people need to know a mandated activation HAS occured. without true unbroken majority pre activation. (because they broke consensus pre activation to fake the 100%..)
and it can happen again. !

no matter how forgetful you are. block data is immutable and its data does not lie nor does other peoples memory. so just accept it.

the data overrules your silly games. so give up your charade

and people need to be aware that it can happen again so that we can watch for tactics of certain dev groups and economic nodes pushing for PoS

instead of being lulled into social drama games of fake promise and  finger pointing of blame other people EG current game to make people look at greenpeace, when the real things we should look at is this months push to change regulations from SEC to CFTC which come with actual ramifications

yes changing to CFTC regulators will change things and affect things
dont play your ignorant games for once

The whole idea of the NYA was to push for a 2mb base blocksize after SegWit activated, you total fucking cretin.  Just because you still conflate the thing that actually activated SegWit with the NYA (despite the fact they were two very different things), doesn't make it true.  The NYA supporters never got their 2mb base blocksize.  The true majority resisted it.  Now stop derailing the thread with your manipulative horseshit.  Absolute fucking basketcase.


//EDIT:

Since franky1 is clearly insane and doesn't have the slightest grip on reality, here's a reminder of the actual NYA for all the sane people out there:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/New_York_Agreement
https://fullycrypto.com/what-was-the-bitcoin-new-york-agreement
https://www.mycryptopedia.com/scaling-bitcoin-the-new-york-agreement-explained/

SegWit2x/SegWit2mb demonstrably never went ahead.  Regular SegWit was activated via BIP91.  The NYA was deemed a failure by everyone (except franky1, who somehow thinks it succeeded).

such ignorance and lies from you are astonishing you have been debunked dozens of times. you keep accepting you been debunked, forget that you got debunked to then try to push your nonsense again that there was no hardfork to activate segwit

hard data in the blockchain. show that the NYA(blueline) triggered at 80% to start ignoring opposition blocks, to get segwit(redline) activated
by showing a high segwit acceptance via removing opposition blocks.

segwit(redline) only reached a natural consensus of 43.75% in july
but it was because of the blue line which was the NYA which required a flag to reach 80% for a period of time. to then trigger the rejection of opposers
the trigger event of ignoring opposing blocks to segwitshows that the red line then went unnaturally horizontal in an even straight ligne.. because MATH
every day e144 block. if all blocks were 100% segwit signalling due to 0 opposers plays out like this
882-43.75%      1026-50.89%      1170-58%      1314-65.18%
1458-72.32%    1602-79.46%      1746-86.6%   1890-93.75%
2016-100%

thus had 100% on (unnatural to actually have 100% in a decentralised world)
everyone can see the block data

segwit had 100% because there was 0% opposition.
in a natural consensus of decentralised world 100% is not natural

the only way there was 0% opposition is because the opposition blocks were removed by august 1st.
do you know what also happened on august 1st yep BCH
yes the blockdata and BCH exist. there was a fork. now stop being so forgetful

stop pretending segwit was soft becasue the soft had only 20%.. and remember that it was a hard because there was 100% opposition due to the hard mandate tactics to ignore opposers before segwit activated. and yes there was a fork because BCH was created.. and no bch did not create themselves. they were pushed off btc into a fork via the block rejects

there is DATA, there is actual real life proof of events..

so after 5 years of your ignorant trolling pretending you keep forgetting and cant remember events.. just stop

the CODE. the blocdata, is more proof than your social drama links of peoples opinion that wanted to set narratives to shift blame
...
and with that said
give up the social drama games of loyal buddy siding..
instead try to be helpful and actually know that events occurred and those mandated upgrade activations can happen again. so that people can be risk aware incase another mandated activation happened where the tactics are used to activate a feature like PoS

oh and you do realise that the core devs admit it occurred.. so why are you 7 years later trying to pretend it didnt happen. because its no longer fanboy protectionism of your favoured devs reputation for aiding in pulling off the tactic by pretending they didnt.. because they admit it did happen. so whats your agenda for your ignorance?

At the end of the day, bitcoin is found guilty on both counts, btc using green energy is guilty, don't use green energy is even more guilty. It is a back and forth meme that will never end as long as the name bitcoin exists.
Even though it has been shown on several occasions that btc mining is not a threat to the environment nor waste energy, the anti-bitcoin will never change their views towards btc.

That's right. Also rich idiots idiots. They are raising a lot of money from brainwashed rich individuals (or maybe not brainwashed but more of that later). In 2013 they lost £3m because a member of their group decided to play with the raised money on the stock market and lost it all

As for those brainwashed or not, their arctic campaign managed to stop Shell from drilling there, but other oil companies continued to do so. This pout Shell at a disadvantage. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the competitors donated to the cause.

Can you imagine that the electricity (nuclear, coil, oil...) used by thousands of banks in their building, machines...and millions of tree cut for their daily supplements are greenish and machines used to mine Bitcoin are bad?
I am pro saving the planet and cutting useless waste of earth resources but this is just hypocrisy from their sides.
Ethereum made a move that needs to be evaluated in middle and long term since it is a big change from one of the biggest cryptocurrencies.

This is just nonsense. Climate is changing, you should have noticed this by now. Temperature is changing. There is increased drought. It is harming health. Unless you're about to question every paper out there?

Sure and it can be used as a weapon (it's already been), but that doesn't mean there's no climate change.

If it's securing the network it isn't waste. It might be for you, who isn't using bitcoin, but apparently not for everybody else.

All devs.  Not just core devs.  I wouldn't expect you to be honest about that, though.  You're too busy trying to tell people what they shouldn't be allowed to do.     



If you took off your dementia hat, you'd realise no one has amnesia.  No one is going to remember things that never actually occurred (outside of your imagination).  If anything, your views were more closely aligned with what the NYA group wanted, because they were asking for a hardfork.  You want a hardfork.  Guess what?  This so-called "economic majority" of yours didn't get what they wanted.  Because they were never the true majority.  The majority decided not to pursue a hardfork at that time.  That's the reality you still seem unable to recognise.

Now, if you're quite finished trying to distort recorded events and generally being a paranoid-delusional crackpot, screeching about boogeymen and jumping at shadows, please let some sanity prevail and stop spouting nonsense.

I wonder if there was a campaign against the internet back then and they use the global warming nonsense as they using it against Bitcoin right now. If so, I bet those people are using the internet nowadays and forget about their nonsense because obviously they were getting paid to do it by some companies who will gonna lose their businesses when the internet becomes essential all around the world. I think history will repeat itself when they see there's no way for them to spend their wealth except to buy bitcoins in the future.

says the (dcg sponsored) core dev team fanboy

says the guy that loved core devs(mostly under the umbrella of DCG) ability to mandate an upgrade activation with support from the 2017 NY agreement of economic nodes

says the guy that things core devs should code what they like and if users dont like it they can go play on an altcoin. ..

once you see that DCG is regulated by america. and DCG can pull that same 2017 tactic again. and you see that CFTC are trying to take place over the SEC. thus allowing a new door for the EPA to jump in..
.. you should see the risks of possibility. to be risk aware

anyway its not that CFTC have power of me (bitcoin user but british)
its not power over me
its the big exchanges and merchants (THE ECONOMIC NODES) which are regulated and...
..regulators have power over THEM

YOU KNOW THIS STUFF dont put your amnesia hat on now, dont play dumb and then try hugging your pals back to sleep telling them everything is fine and they dont need to do anything..
you know full well about the NYA and the mandated code event all sponsored and organised by those within the DCG portfolio

and users nodes end up(not much choice) following the chain that the exchanges(economic nodes follow) and merchants decide to accept as BTC. because users want to have their transactions seen on the chain merchants and exchanges follow so that people can buy/sell or swap for fiat with such

as for regulators pushing Devs
again just as DCG did in 2017 with the economic nodes(NYA) DCG also sponsored and demanded their employees(blockstream) to code the mandated upgrade.

yep now its "seems" like there are now 3 teams (brinks, blockstream and chaincodelabs) but under a CFTC regulation, sister with the EPA. bitcoin could have developers regulated to do software updates FOR/on behalf of certain regulated services.  

yep DCG group as a financial portfolio company might get pressure from regulators to push for a PoS "mandated upgrade"
thus re-visiting the tactics of 2017

these tactics are something people need to be aware of and remember.. more so then some social drama of greenpeace

No, “climate change” is not real. Just because the majority is saying so, that doesn't make something to be a scientific truth. We’ve seen this so many times before in history. This is so well documented, that I’m not going to lose my time posting links to what it is and has been obvious since this “climate change” propaganda started.

There’s barely 90 to 100 years of temperature and climate data. The Earth is around 4.5 billion years old. How could anyone get conclusions about any change with 100 years within a data range of 4,5 billion years? Nobody in his right mind would consider such an “study” serious because it is not. There is no data to confirm any “climate change”. There’s no data to link humans to that unconfirmed climate change.

This is just another anthropocentric religion. Another one! I do not discuss other people’s beliefs, but do not call it science. It is a religion. Full Stop.

And when a religion is the State religion, guess what? It will be the means the State will use to justify collecting and stealing money from its citizens, while they bend down their heads and consent.

This is what BTC is about. This the real people’s silent revolution against the State. It has started by blowing up the monetary foundations of this State totalitarian regime and will finish by debunking all the lies the States have been spreading to enslave their citizens (the fiat money system allows them to spend without limits to spread their lies). The “climate change” is one of the biggest.

Look for astrophysicist Pears Corbyn. He’s a scientist! Read or listen to what he’s saying about all this climate change BS. Oh, yes, he’s been already tagged as a “conspiracy theorist”, as probably is my case, Ron Paul’s, Tulsi Gabard’s and anyone who dares to challenge globalist elite falsehoods. Of course, how come not? We are Russian agents, and whatever come to their mains. The typical communist resort of calling anyone against all their nonsense a “fascist” (which the Democrats in the US have adopted recently as their own basic tactic), as much as the Republicans used to call from the 50’s up to the 80’s anyone opposing their warmongering BS as “communists”. Nothing new, so nothing to be surprised.

---

And the real problem to convert BTC to PoS does not lie in the miners, as they’re just services providers to the nodes (they owners). BTC belongs to anyone or less say, it belongs to everyone who decide to install a full BTC node. It is not possible to move from PoW as it would hamper single normal people to own the very source of their wealth: running a full BTC node. 

PoW is one of the greatest inventions of history. PoS is nothing but the same BS running every single fiat currency, company stock, and so on. There’s no such an invention in PoS. It is just an euphemism for same old legacy BS that’s been running for ages.


[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

The truth of the matter is that "Greenhouse" need to understand is that a change in the consensus of Bitcoin from PoW to PoS is not the solution to that perfect climate they anticipate for, because we have got many other factors still affecting climate more than the energy emissions used for bitcoin mining, such as burning of fuel, oil and gas, and volcanic eruptions which occurs on a regular basis, because a change of its consensus will actually deviate the true meaning of Bitcoin, which stands for a decentralized and independent digital currency

Either Bitcoin doesn't have a jurisdiction or it has many thousands of jurisdictions.  I don't see why people constantly get their panties in a twist about the US above all else.  If you aren't an American, they don't hold power over you, so stop treating them as though they do.  Bitcoin is global and this isn't 'Team America: World Police'.  These bureaucratic idiots are over-reaching and don't seem to realise that American influence on the world stage is beginning to wane.  Centralised services, however, do have jurisdictions.  If you use any form of custodial service, then yes, be very concerned if those services are based in the US.  

President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen recently raised an alarm that most European nations are losing years of environmental sustainability efforts in a few months because of the shortage of gas. Yes these nations need to ensure that their inhabitants survive this challenging period but they also need to know that Bitcoin has the capacity to positively touch the lives of many, hence it is also very essential.    

Greenpeace is wasting a whole lot of money that could have been used to seek an alternative source of power. There are many nonpowered dams that can be converted to powered dams and most old dams can be remodeled to produce more power.
It is also important to note that Ethereum's switch to PoS is in its experimental stage. In a few months, the challenges and disadvantages of this switch would become evident to all.

You realize you are on a bitcoin forum, right?

Of course there will be bias when topics like this come up.

Just a week or two ago, there was a thread asking whether "this is the end for cryptocurrency". 50 people voted. Every single one of them voted "No", not a single one "Yes".

This is exactly the issue. First off, I'd argue supporting a currency, with electricity, that divests away from proof of war (the $USD / $EUR / etc), is much better for the planet than not doing so.

But that said, the biggest issue is what you already said, dealing with opportunity cost. Even if they were correct (they aren't), there are things that they could battle against with a much higher saving-the-planet-ROI.

Total nonsense. It's so bad I have to wonder if it's a government co-opted plant.

How many TWh are spent annually on Bitcoin mining? How much in comparison will be lost on an annual basis? The main question is where is Bitcoin in this whole problem that you and similar proponents keep highlighting?

---

For someone who compares Bitcoin to tulips, you don't seem very intelligent?

---

I have a feeling that in 10 years you'll feel pretty stupid when you read your post - along with these geniuses from Greenpeace.

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.

If they had a project of buying up bogland so it couldn't be vandalised/burnt or actually invested in renewables or lobbying for them they'd be much more productive - especially now when oil has doubled in price at least in a lot of places.

If you complain about bitcoin being PoW on an ad, is there not.apotential you're advertising bitcoin to those who are against you too - which might be a lot of people?

Based on the fact 2 companies hold 40% of the eth staking capital, it might be worse than banking as PoS and is definitely worse than customer/investor owned banks too (that used to exist and have been reinvented).

The mixture of GreenPeace, ETH, Merge and putting bitcoin at the end only shows that there is always a search for a topic to direct opinion matrices and start creating "speculation" around the real debate, the Merge and that ETH fans express their opinion.

By the way, who finances the GP campaign?

+1
There is a queue of old companies in energy consumption and others that are surely yet to come, or surely many of the existing ones will grow in consumption over the years, so as you mentioned, green solutions are the way to incorporate them into a long-term solution, that is, not a punctual one as it wants to be seen with bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not the only challenge to climate change, there are many other challenges even with more effect on climate than just bitcoins. They are just a group of individuals who have misplaced priorities and have been misled because of misinformation or under information about the major causes of climate changes. If they have had proper information, they would channel their energy plus resources to campaigning about Increasing deforestation and increased combustion of coal, oil and gas which are leading causes.

I wish they spent money on something more meaningful, not on ads against PoW. Some are fast to attack Bitcoin because they don't like it much, don't understand it, and think they can succeed if they go against it. That's not possible, the consensus to move from PoW to PoS won't be reached.
Climate change is real, but fighting Bitcoin won't stop it or even meaningfully make the problem smaller. There are plenty of other areas where meaningful change is possible and where advocating for change would make more sense.
Also, it would be nice if they did their research to prove that if they succeed, things will actually get better and it won't be that the dirty energy Bitcoin used would immediately get used up by other players, so it won't even make that tiny difference it's supposed to make. And, on the contrary, I've heard interesting arguments that Bitcoin can actually stimulate switch to green energy because it can be what creates demand for it.

Here is the link: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/greenpeace-intensifies-campaign-against-bitcoin-after-ethereum-merge.

They just don’t get it. Of course, it is impossible to understand something when their income depends on not understanding it. Well, this is the difference between honesty (Bitcoin) and total moral corruption (Ethereum and the rest of the fiat world).

I repeat. There is no such an invention in PoS. This is the way fiat currencies and even the gold standard worked since the origins of monetary history. All modern nationalized fiat currencies (the USD, the EUR, the GBP, etc.) are already digital and working under the PoS model.  Where is the innovation? Nowhere.

This is the computer versus the typing machine, and old fogeys proposing going back to the typing machine because computers spend energy. Well, you type… I’ll use a computer. Let’s see who wins.