Topic: Regulations on proof of work might be coming - page 3. (Read 1055 times)

I'd say almost definitely, which would be a shame when you compare it to the other industries which are plainly being ignored. I don't know how wide scaled this ban would be, but I can see it happening in certain countries. The thing is we've entered an era where energy is on the tip of everyone's tongue, and how that might influence the environment is something that's almost become a marketing scheme. Basically, the more green friendly you're the more business you get.

There was a meme the other day, which I believe was actually true; a supermarket a well known one in the UK, decided to put Vegan friendly on some vegetables. Plus, fast food places are now doing plant based burgers. It's the future, it's exactly how you sell more, and look good in your customers eyes. That you care about the environment, and therefore care about them.

It's not any different with Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn't look good for those that haven't adopted it, which is the majority of the population of the world, and therefore if the governments were to ban it for the energy concerns, despite how inaccurate they might be, they've achieve mass support.

While Bitcoin PoW continues to be an insanely stupid waste of energy resources.

Ethereum has evolved leaving behind the dead-end technology know as Proof of work/Waste.

https://decrypt.co/109848/ethereum-energy-carbon-footprint-down-99-percent-merge


When Btc is banned for refusing to evolve, BTC PoW supporters have no one to blame but themselves.
https://flipboard.com/topic/pollution/limit-or-eliminate-biden-executive-order-triggers-shock-u-s-bitcoin-ban-propos/a-lp2GunLlQ8i1iscosrxElQ%3Aa%3A23460606-dd306aba00%2Fforbes.com

BTC Ban incoming , by US lawmakers or even sooner by executive order.
Time is almost up for the delusional that can't perceive the reality that BTC Pow is a dumpster fire.

 


FYI:
Even Texas Officials are starting to understand how deadly the BTC PoW waste is becoming.
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/08/29/the-end-of-the-texas-bitcoin-mining-gold-rush/

https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/22/07/23/044233/are-bitcoin-mining-plants-helping-or-hurting-texas-power-grid

One thing that is often ignored is that more than half of the population is stupid, dependent on a shit job or wage and lacks critical thinking. The strategy of blaming things on something always works pretty well for the government because the average person believes what they say.

Also, if the strategy of blaming on others fails for the government, then they always show their Trump Card that always wins the game and guess what's that called? Direct one’s attention. They'll direct your attention on subjects like Covid or the new pandemic explosion, black lives matter, bitcoin, guns, drugs, etc.

We live in a world where slavery is called freedom. People in governments are legal criminals Far more dangerous criminals than others but they remain legal cause they decided to be so.

asic resistance does not lower electric usage. it just lowers hashrate/difficulty

those on asic resistant algo's just end up setting up GPU farms
which have high electric usage for low hashrate output (inefficiency)

EG 1x s19 asic = 3.25kwh for 110,000Ghash
16x GPU rack = 3.25kwh for 1Ghash

---

miners have to follow the rules core developers set out.(singular reference client point of failure weakness of bitcoin*)
users follow the rules BUT if the rules changed overnight(mandated/contentious fork). they follow the network that is most accepted by majority of exchanges/merchants/services(so that people can spend coins with known services)

---

something to not be afraid of this second but be aware of(for research/learning and matter of fact knowledge of risk) a possibility.

another "mandatory upgrade" could occur (blockstream +NYA tactics) but next time via regulatory push, involving mandated activation code that signals a changeover to a non-PoW mining algo

whereby (scenario to be aware of)
all the main licenced/regulated exchanges/services/merchants have to regulatory comply to agree to only accept non PoW coins, (call that the NY agreement comparable)
where they also push the core devs to code it(call it the Blockstream push comparable*)

take a few moments to think of the ramifications of the 2017 tactics used to mandate a feature upgrade, being used again, but this time by regulators pushing devs and exchanges to collude and push for another upgrade.
just so that you can be aware of possibilities
if a financial portfolio group DCG managed to pull it off in 2017. regulators can too

---

*dont turn this into a social drama debate about insults, taking sides, defending brands or pointing finger or trying to rewrite history depending on loyalty camps.
just use the hard data,code, facts of history of the event that occurred. to think about how it can be used again in the future against bitcoiners.

for people to watch out and prevent the risks, people need to be aware of the risks. dont shy away from being risk aware.

I speculate that because of the high cost of energy and the concerns caused by ESG, proof of work mining might be more than regulated. It might be banned in some jurisdictions. We might also begin to witness a more serious argument battle between proof of work vs. proof of stake within the cryptospace. I also predict that Elon Musk and Tesla will buy Ethereum for Tesla's balance sheet.

Sometimes I get confused about what the government is afraid of Bitcoin. The government sees Bitcoin as a terrorist who can threaten its power. They continue to develop negative issues towards crypto especially Bitcoin. The most frequent reasons they give are about the use of electricity, noise, and negative economic impacts. Actually all these reasons are refuted by what Bitcoin users do. Most mining projects no longer use government-owned electricity, but use solar power. Then about noise, could the sound of mining equipment make an area uncomfortable? If so, why doesn't the government apply the rules for using mining equipment to be at a distance from residential areas. Furthermore, regarding the negative economic impact argument, Bitcoin has actually improved the community's economy, and it can help the government burden.
There is indeed something bad about crypto, we can't deny in this, but don't generalize it, let alone mention Bitcoin. One of the bad things is the existence of problematic projects that can harm investors. But that's crypto, not Bitcoin. Crypto is general, while Bitcoin is absolute, special, single.
But I believe any steps to deny Bitcoin can't work normally. It's talking about power and capitalism. Even though we are not between the two, we can enjoy the coffers of the existence of Bitcoin.

Everything is hypocrisy, everything is a lie, and everything is politics. You can get away with everything if you control the right industries. Look how much hate there is right now towards everything Russian. Russian sports, Russian academia, music, companies, organizations, innocent citizens who haven't done everything wrong. Why? Because we are being fed to hate them by those not better than them. I have a friend of a friend who grows his own fruits and vegetables and exports a lot of it to Russia. He doesn't want to trade with them anymore despite Russian importers being solely responsible for his wealth and well-being with a long history of business dealings. I am waiting on when there will be a total ban on everything US because of their democratic efforts in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, etc. How about lying to the world that there are nuclear weapons to wage a war? Anyone? Any ETA? Only then should we consider a total ban of everything Russian. What a puppet show.

Kosovo: An independent state, maybe, please?
Everyone: Of course, we are behind you 100%. We welcome you to the club. Long live Kosovo.

Catalunya: An independent state, maybe, please?
Everyone: Are you out of your damn mind? What's wrong with you? There will be no restructuring of state borders whatsoever. How dare you propose something like that? You should be ashamed of yourself. Arrest that man!

Rant over.

Maybe they already know that renewable energy can't last long in mining equipment with drains. if they do something like this, maybe their country will be affected by other countries and will continue to mine using fossil fuels. But I wouldn't be surprised by the rule of law this will cause conflict again to countries where miners are free to mine BTC.

I am aware of this. This is why I was saying to try to maintain Asic resistance or develop methods to maintain it longer. I reckon the best example of a cryptocoin that has been trying to maintain Asic resistance is Monero. However, their hard fork to the RandomX mining algorithm might be the last try. If it will not successful, they will change the mining algorithm again to Sha 3 where it will be easier for hardware developers to create Asic.

It's not wasting energy. Energy is being bought on a free market. A power company puts a price tag on it and is also allowed to put a limit on your connection. Moreover, you are required to state the amount you'll need before they agree to connect you to the grid.

This means that if I build a house and request a 50 kW connection, it can be approved or denied. If they approve, this means they can spare this much for my house. A typical home needs 15 kW, so if I get 50, it means I can use the rest to mine, or heat my pool, or light my personal tennis court. They don't care what I'll do with it, the same way a grocery store owner doesn't care if you eat the food you buy, feed it to your dog, or throw it away.  

Government putting additional restrictions is once again trying to interfere with a free market, putting itself between the seller and the buyer.

the government will not calculate how much energy banks use, or some other agencies and companies that pay taxes to the government. Mining
Bitcoin is discriminated against because it appears to use too much energy, when it is only a percentage of the energy used by other sectors.
Excessive and frequent use of building air conditioners also contributes to global warming because AC produces freon which will be released into the atmosphere of the earth and cause a hole in the ozone layer because it contains CFC gas.
The government only makes crypto miners or bitcoin miners as scapegoats.

Ok, it will only be fair towards Bitcoin.. if they "regulate" the Banking sector too.. right? I mean... how much energy are used to run the Banking system? How much pollution is generated from their activities....

1. CCTV cameras + DVR's + Routers for security at all their buildings
2. Armored cars exhaust fumes from those large Diesel engines to transport the cash.
3. All those air-conditioning units in their building to make them nice and cosy.
4. Computers + Printers + Servers + switches + ATM's + card readers that are used.

So, how much regulations are forced onto the Banking sector to reduce their environmental impact on our world? 

I do agree that a lot of the stuff the media and governments print out about energy usage on POW is quite ridiculous but I can definitely agree that if something seems like it's wasting a lot of energy for a lot of nothing, it should raise concerns.

That said, we have to stop asking why anyone would ban POW but ask why people don't understand the benefits it brings.

It is like idiotic to start banning what people use power for, but we need to start understanding more, and in some countries why it became a problem.

Only if ASIC resistance wasn't a fake concept and could actually be implemented. So far what we have seen has been ASIC postponement since they create a different algorithm that the existing ASICs are not meant to solve so it buys them time until the day there is enough incentive for them to build a new ASIC that solves that particular algorithm. Like LTC history with scrypt which was introduced as ASIC resistance until the day they created LTC-ASICs.

There might be good arguments on the regulation of bitcoin mining and the regulation of energy usage of proof of work mining in America, however, similar to what the regulators have always done before, they use the laws and the rules created into a weapon to use against the ones who are regulated.

I reckon this only gives an argument for those cryptocoins that are trying to maintain Asic resistance to develop methods to maintain it longer.

That's true but the problem is that any government that faces energy crisis will always do the easiest thing which is to find something to blame all their incompetence on and redirect the public opinion there. The best option seems to be bitcoin these days. Funny thing is if they go as far as banning bitcoin, they'll have nothing left to blame while the "crisis" rages on. More countries are facing same crisis these days.
For example when China banned bitcoin mining, their total electricity consumption didn't come down even a little. But they stopped having something to blame it on.

The governments can find a thousand excuses to continue oppressing the Bitcoin mining industry. This will continue forever.
I'm sure that the Bitcoin miners in the US will try as much as they can to abide by all the ridiculous rules and regulations, that put discriminate them in comparison to other industries, that are way more damaging to the environment and are wasting way more energy.
Even if the BTC miners lose the battle in the USA, they will move overseas and find a better place.
My hope is that solar panels and wind turbines will become cheap enough so that there won't be a problem for the miners to build their facilities in any country in the world. The problem is cooling down the mining hardware, which limits the amount of locations, where the miners can build a facility.

Not exclusively, not by a long shot. It certainly can use power which would otherwise be wasted, and its ability to quickly ramp up and down to utilize this excess power is vital for a working renewable grid, but it is nowhere near running on 100% wasted power.

New renewable energy is not only already cheaper than new fossil fuel plants (and has been for some years), but it is also starting to become cheaper to build new renewables from scratch than it is to even simply continue to operate currently existing fossil fuel plants.

enforcing the banning law will be difficult for the authorities however. we could see china had done it in 2021 but there are still miners on the ground in China mining BTC as measured by hash rate. Bitcoin is the rebel they couldn't take control but this is understandable as government doesn't want any currency competing the USD. they may be successful in the first few months in enforcing but eventually the miners will be back.

I believe that policies that are aiming to lower environmental impact should be pursued because climate change will have devastating effects and mostly on communities that aren't at all to be blamed for it. The US is the largest consumer of beef in the world, and beef is heavily responsible for greenhouse gas emissions. It's also well-known that consumption of too much red meat carries serious health risks. So here you go, there's a thing where they could cut down the industry, reducing the environmental impact and health risks. The US is also extremely high in the number of cars per capita in the world (#2 if we exclude very small countries). Cars not only are bad for the environment but also take up a lot of space as well as force people to sit for an even longer time with little movement, which is also unhealthy. So here's another area where making regulations would be a good way to contribute to solving several issues. But no, they're [potentially] going after mining, which isn't even all bad for the environment because it depends on the energy sources and which doesn't have strong other adverse effects, not to mention it being a tiny part of things contributing to climate change.