Topic: Interesting cover from the BBC (Read 2064 times)
well at least its on the news now . . . the more people hear about it, the more people research it. that leads to an increase in interest, always a good thing.
A radio4 piece on Bitcoin ...... http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s0qnk
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22153687
Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
We all thought bitcoin will be banned through drugs or terrorism and they (government) decided it is going to be banned through environmentalism
It's 21 century terrorism.
Every element of the world of bitcoin is going to get used to generate some form of news before we get close to seeing mainstream adoption of it.
However, the other side of this is that articles like this may get quoted by anyone with an agenda for the next 10 years to prove how bad bitcoins are.
This is why PPCoin is such a good idea - it kills the argument dead.
However, the other side of this is that articles like this may get quoted by anyone with an agenda for the next 10 years to prove how bad bitcoins are.
This is why PPCoin is such a good idea - it kills the argument dead.
we're already in an ice age...(both poles are covered = ice age)
bitcoins getting us out the ice age faster, is more realistic
bitcoins getting us out the ice age faster, is more realistic
Well, since most people actually believe in ACGW, they'll freak out without even a thought towards the facts.
The article just shows how desperate those that are threatened by bitcoins are. They'll publish any kind of drivel whatsoever to try to attack BTC in the public mind.
The article just shows how desperate those that are threatened by bitcoins are. They'll publish any kind of drivel whatsoever to try to attack BTC in the public mind.
BITCOINS!
PREVENTING THE COMING ICE AGE!
lol....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22153687
Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
I guess bad (?) press is also press.Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
For me personally, the fact that the BBC picks up on this topic and reports on it shows that Bitcoin is also on the radar of the general public.
I'm looking forward to this 
seeing political groups do math against people who do math for a living and actually check over their work will be hilarious to watch.
They seem to be repeating that line a lot without really explaining what it means >_<
seeing political groups do math against people who do math for a living and actually check over their work will be hilarious to watch.Quote
Bitcoins are earned online by completing difficult computing tasks.
They seem to be repeating that line a lot without really explaining what it means >_<
In retrospect , the emergence of mankind on the surface of planet earth was an environmental disaster .
ASICs are now available and so GPU and FPGA mining will become obsolete. They won't mine enough to cover the cost of electricity.
The price of the ASICs themselves is the limiting factor when calculating your mining profit, NOT the power they consume. Getting cheap electricity is not going to be relevant anymore.
The price of the ASICs themselves is the limiting factor when calculating your mining profit, NOT the power they consume. Getting cheap electricity is not going to be relevant anymore.
I think this is temporary. Competition will drive ASIC prices down and miners will buy more and more until power cost is the dominant factor again.
The article just shows how desperate those that are threatened by bitcoins are. They'll publish any kind of drivel whatsoever to try to attack BTC in the public mind.
No doubt, you didn't bother to read the article. It is quite balanced once you get past the headline:
Quote
However, other analysts disagree.
Tim Worstall, a fellow at the Adam Smith Institute, dismissed the quantity of electricity being used for mining as "trivial" on the website Forbes.
"There are around 120 million or so households in the US. Therefore Bitcoin mining is consuming 0.025% of the US household electricity supply," he wrote.
"This is without even thinking about the energy requirements of business and industry. Do also note that that is the power consumed by global Bitcoin mining... I feel secure in stating that Bitcoin mining really isn't a real-world environmental disaster."
Tim Worstall, a fellow at the Adam Smith Institute, dismissed the quantity of electricity being used for mining as "trivial" on the website Forbes.
"There are around 120 million or so households in the US. Therefore Bitcoin mining is consuming 0.025% of the US household electricity supply," he wrote.
"This is without even thinking about the energy requirements of business and industry. Do also note that that is the power consumed by global Bitcoin mining... I feel secure in stating that Bitcoin mining really isn't a real-world environmental disaster."
Well, since most people actually believe in ACGW, they'll freak out without even a thought towards the facts.
The article just shows how desperate those that are threatened by bitcoins are. They'll publish any kind of drivel whatsoever to try to attack BTC in the public mind.
The article just shows how desperate those that are threatened by bitcoins are. They'll publish any kind of drivel whatsoever to try to attack BTC in the public mind.
What about all the wars in regions that do not support the central banking system, how much energy is the West expending dropping bombs on third world people?
How much energy are the government expending printing money to infinity?
How much energy are the government expending printing money to infinity?
Any idea how many ATM's there are worldwide? Those things have to be using at least a 100w average. They publish blockchains estimated figure (likely based on GPU's) as an accurately monitored figure and then obfuscate that figure using different time scales and finally scale the Bitcoin global energy usage estimate against US national energy usage. Lies, damn lies and statistics but at least it means we're in the final stage (...then they fight you...).
They're about 2.2Million ATM's worldwide AFAIK IIRC. So if they all use 100W that's 220MW or 5.28GWh per twenty-four hours against bitcoins 0.982GWh. Plus that's just the actual ATM and not any of the network servers ect.
http://www.atmmachine.com/triton-9100.htm
So the lowest possible value per day for atm's is over 12000 MWh compared to an estimated 982 MWh for the Bitcoin network using a figure based on more or less obsolete hardware that uses over 60x the power of current ASIC systems.
I think your comparison is not valid. Bitcoin transaction numbers and amounts are in no way comparable to all ATMS worldwide, so why should energy consumption be? By the time bitcoin would play a significant role in world economy, it's energy consumption would be orders of magnitude higher.
This article is a bit late.
ASICs are now available and so GPU and FPGA mining will become obsolete. They won't mine enough to cover the cost of electricity.
The price of the ASICs themselves is the limiting factor when calculating your mining profit, NOT the power they consume. Getting cheap electricity is not going to be relevant anymore.
I'd still rather mine than run a space heater in the winter. It's not like the power consumed is a complete waste.
ASICs are now available and so GPU and FPGA mining will become obsolete. They won't mine enough to cover the cost of electricity.
The price of the ASICs themselves is the limiting factor when calculating your mining profit, NOT the power they consume. Getting cheap electricity is not going to be relevant anymore.
I'd still rather mine than run a space heater in the winter. It's not like the power consumed is a complete waste.
Any idea how many ATM's there are worldwide? Those things have to be using at least a 100w average. They publish blockchains estimated figure (likely based on GPU's) as an accurately monitored figure and then obfuscate that figure using different time scales and finally scale the Bitcoin global energy usage estimate against US national energy usage. Lies, damn lies and statistics but at least it means we're in the final stage (...then they fight you...).
They're about 2.2Million ATM's worldwide AFAIK IIRC. So if they all use 100W that's 220MW or 5.28GWh per twenty-four hours against bitcoins 0.982GWh. Plus that's just the actual ATM and not any of the network servers ect.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22153687
Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
We all thought bitcoin will be banned through drugs or terrorism and they (government) decided it is going to be banned through environmentalism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22153687
Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
Wonder how people new to bitcoin will react to news like this?
Jump to: