Topic: What happens when the "Greens" object to bitcoin - page 2. (Read 1051 times)
Use the blockstream satellites to collect solar energy. This will shut their mouths.
Why only focus on Proof of Stake? There are other interesting technologies that could be used.
I admit that I lack a deep technological understanding, but for me, Bram Cohen's (Bittorrent creator) "Proof of Space" could be an interesting alternative. It's more similar to standard PoW mining because everybody can start mining "from zero" using external resources. But it wastes less electricity, because the "attack price" is not based primarily on the electricity price used to carry out the attack. (There is already an experimental altcoin called "Burst" using a similar algorithm).
In the case it's proven secure, I see no problem in Bitcoin adopting that technology.
Good point. Proof of Space and Proof of Liveness are definitely possibilities too, at least in terms of moving off "electricity" (with all its baggage) as the scarce resource of choice.I admit that I lack a deep technological understanding, but for me, Bram Cohen's (Bittorrent creator) "Proof of Space" could be an interesting alternative. It's more similar to standard PoW mining because everybody can start mining "from zero" using external resources. But it wastes less electricity, because the "attack price" is not based primarily on the electricity price used to carry out the attack. (There is already an experimental altcoin called "Burst" using a similar algorithm).
In the case it's proven secure, I see no problem in Bitcoin adopting that technology.
As for "mining with only external resources"... well, there's pros and cons to that. The fact that (with proof of work/space/etc) people can enter the system without establishing a link to "someone who bought the coins" is a powerful property for a cryptocurrency to have... but so is being able to "self-host", without consuming any physically scarce resource at all.
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
All the green parties are complete nonsense. Wherever the are or were power, things has gone worse!!!
And I can tell you they can scream, cry and rant as much as they want, Bitcoin will not care!!!
There won't be a POW change just because some irrelavant dummies want so.
All the buildings to house employees, computers to keep track of databases, cars to drive banknotes around and the private jets of the corrupt banksters...
If you talk about bankers' private jets, then you must also mention happy Bitcoiners' Lambos
But I get your point, and I think you're right. However, improving the current situation investigating possible alternative algorithms should not be forbidden.
I think the whole Bitcoiner Lambo thing is embarrassing, even though it is mostly tongue-in-cheek. We are the vanguard of the new economic system, one based on sustainability instead of cancerous infinite growth and consumerism and we should act like it!
Investigating alternatives to Bitcoin style PoW security should of course be encouraged! There is always room for improvement.
Hydropower energy is actually renewable & clean energy and soon there will be more hydropower plants all over the world enough to power all house hold devices + bitcoin mining equipments. Also soon use of solar and wind energy will be common in most of the area, bitcoin miners doesn't run on fossil fuel actually.
So topic of green energy might not hit hard on bitcoin mining industry but there are lots of debates popping up regarding energy consumption by these miners is just waste lately.
So topic of green energy might not hit hard on bitcoin mining industry but there are lots of debates popping up regarding energy consumption by these miners is just waste lately.
It is inevitable. It has not gained a lot of traction yet, because very few people know about bitcoin, and only those who do are aware of the power consumption. Once they start making noise, governments will be pressured to regulate mining and crack down on mining farms. It is not a pretty picture. It is not sustainable either, so we should look at the power consumption as a problem that needs to be solved.
All the buildings to house employees, computers to keep track of databases, cars to drive banknotes around and the private jets of the corrupt banksters...
If you talk about bankers' private jets, then you must also mention happy Bitcoiners' Lambos
But I get your point, and I think you're right. However, improving the current situation investigating possible alternative algorithms should not be forbidden.
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
We gently remind them, that Bitcoin is replacing the legacy banking system, which is consuming orders of magnitude more energy than the Bitcoin network. All the buildings to house employees, computers to keep track of databases, cars to drive banknotes around and the private jets of the corrupt banksters...you get the point. Bitcoin energy consumption is a drop of water in the ocean compared to that.
If they still don't get it, they should contemplate the following: our legacy financial system is predicated upon perpetual growth, driven by inflationary spending. It has to continue to find new ways to monetize new areas of human experience and natural resources. Through this it is driving the complete destruction of our environment and the conversion of all the resources into useless crap. Bitcoin puts an end to these incentives. Greens should happily support Bitcoin.
Long-term, I figure the most likely outcomes are:
Why only focus on Proof of Stake? There are other interesting technologies that could be used.- Wind/solar become so cheap/plentiful that they outcompete even (e.g.) coal plants in Inner Mongolia for pure BTC/kWh.
- A Bitcoin proof-of-stake fork gets broad community adoption.
- A non-Bitcoin proof-of-stake coin (Casper Ethereum, f'rex) ends up becoming the dominant cryptocoin for everyday users.
I admit that I lack a deep technological understanding, but for me, Bram Cohen's (Bittorrent creator) "Proof of Space" could be an interesting alternative. It's more similar to standard PoW mining because everybody can start mining "from zero" using external resources. But it wastes less electricity, because the "attack price" is not based primarily on the electricity price used to carry out the attack. (There is already an experimental altcoin called "Burst" using a similar algorithm).
In the case it's proven secure, I see no problem in Bitcoin adopting that technology.
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
Nothing will happen most of the bitcoin mining is happening in China a country that obviously does not care about such thing so their objections are going to be useless the only thing they can do is to try to pass laws to make bitcoin mining illegal in their countries but that is all, and even if those laws pass that does not mean that people are going to stop mining bitcoin. This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
Why they dont object the Gold? There is so much energy needed to mine for gold and there after it is mined there is such a devastation. Not to mention, chemicals that poison soil are used when getting pure gold.
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
does it really matter, though? if bitcoin has made one thing clear, it's that governments cannot stop it. 10 or 20 years from now, i think the "greens" will look to us just like the altcoiners pushing proof-of-stake do now. they make the same exact arguments.
i'm partial to the idea proof-of-work mining is wasteful if there is no better alternative. to date, there is no proven method for byzantine fault tolerance that can compare to bitcoin. proof-of-stake is on shaky footing conceptually as it is; it will be many years before we have a working test case (like bitcoin is for proof-of-work).
I mean, they're already objecting. I've seen a lot of Twitter chatter on the topic lately.
Long-term, I figure the most likely outcomes are:
It's also possible that the BTC ecosystem just soldiers on, not caring about its externalities on the literal ecosystem, and its network effects (first mover advantage etc) let it get away with that. But IMO that's a bad outcome, and probably not as likely as the above.
Long-term, I figure the most likely outcomes are:
- Wind/solar become so cheap/plentiful that they outcompete even (e.g.) coal plants in Inner Mongolia for pure BTC/kWh.
- A Bitcoin proof-of-stake fork gets broad community adoption.
- A non-Bitcoin proof-of-stake coin (Casper Ethereum, f'rex) ends up becoming the dominant cryptocoin for everyday users.
It's also possible that the BTC ecosystem just soldiers on, not caring about its externalities on the literal ecosystem, and its network effects (first mover advantage etc) let it get away with that. But IMO that's a bad outcome, and probably not as likely as the above.
I often think it is your third option that may become true.( Casper Ethereum etc..)
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
People have been finding creative ways to get around the high energy usage and heat output. For example, in the future, we could see more areas using the miners in order to heat up smaller spaces.
https://news.bitcoin.com/siberians-use-cryptocurrency-miners-heat-homes/
I saw this article recently and it intrigued me how this man was using the miners to heat up a house. It's very possible that this could be a solution that allows for both parties to come to some kind of consensus about bitcoin mining.
Yea , I heat our home with a small mining farm. I typically upgrade equipment at the end of summer. I am in the southern hemisphere so around March. It just makes a whole lot of sense to do this. On the other hand POS makes a lot of sense too.
The whole capitalist system will always find a way out in this kind of problems, but you all know that tey are doing whatever they want and i am sure that this will end someday.
But you are right with that, but everybody is always trying to find a cheaper solution when they are talking about bitcoins and of course, about bitcoin mining.
It is very expensive in my country and i can not afford the electrity bills, and this is why i dont mine.
But you are right with that, but everybody is always trying to find a cheaper solution when they are talking about bitcoins and of course, about bitcoin mining.
It is very expensive in my country and i can not afford the electrity bills, and this is why i dont mine.
We still might see PoW being the go-to algorithm for coins that wants to get the highest level of security possible for their utilization like bitcoin.
I'm not sure PoW is actually higher-security than second-generation (N@S-resistant) PoS. One big advantage of Proof of Stake is that a 51% attacker can only double-spend once (since executing the attack destroys their stake), whereas a PoW 51% attacker can attack again and again (they still have their mining hardware to give it another go). 
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
We laugh and laugh and laugh...because Bitcoin is one thing they cannot stop with their precious governments.
I imagine there will be massive use of solar panels etc. Once the price of solar comes down even further, it would make sense for a mining farm to buy a solar wall and use that to generate electricity rather than pay for it.
Except that solar panels/cells still costs a fortune to acquire, and what's even more surprising is that some countries still have fucked up laws when it comes to installing your own solar panels to run your household.
We still might see PoW being the go-to algorithm for coins that wants to get the highest level of security possible for their utilization like bitcoin. Quantum computing, day-by-day, is getting nearer and nearer to our hands. It could be the solution for our problem regarding PoW or developer might come to think of other green alternatives to keep the system going.
Sometime in the future the "Greens" will object loudly to Bitcoin's energy consumption. Does anyone think the voices will get so loud, POW for Bitcoin will be a controversy?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
This is one of Bitcoin's weak spots in the public opinion arena. Does anyone think somewhere down the road POW might be changed?
People have been finding creative ways to get around the high energy usage and heat output. For example, in the future, we could see more areas using the miners in order to heat up smaller spaces.
https://news.bitcoin.com/siberians-use-cryptocurrency-miners-heat-homes/
I saw this article recently and it intrigued me how this man was using the miners to heat up a house. It's very possible that this could be a solution that allows for both parties to come to some kind of consensus about bitcoin mining.
the need to find the cheapest and most sustainable electricity will give rise to innovations that previously weren't thought of, also it'll drive the use of renewables and make them cheaper.
the greens will still complain of course but screw them.
the greens will still complain of course but screw them.
Jump to: