Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington • Hacker News Board

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#181

Post by acdha » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:14 PM UTC

vvpan wrote: post #157

acdha wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that the Internet had clear useful applications at that point and billions of dollars in real business (not just speculation) was happening annually. Yes, there were plenty VC misfires with no plausible path to profitability — my favorite was cement.com, with free shipping! — but there were tons of existing businesses finding significant value from it and new companies like Amazon, eBay, Travelocity…

Saying that there is no reason to buy a crypto-currency is absolutely false. You probably live in a Western country where you mostly trust the banking system and stability of your own currency. That is not the case in many other countries. You will probably say that most crypto-currencies are extremely volatile, which is true, but there are already existing and active projects that have addressed that issue, for exam…

Countries without stable currencies tend to use things like USD which have stable values rather than wild fluctuations. That’s a product of a social system and years of practice, not hand waving about magic real-soon-now technology. In your Russian example, the value would be in the link to the commodity rather than whether it’s a printed bill, entry in a database, or record in a block. If that’s honest, any of them will work and if it’s not, none of them will.

Besides, if I lived in Venezuela or Russia, would I really want to record my black market activities in a public ledger which is hard to disavow?

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#182

Post by unpopular42 » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:15 PM UTC

vertex-four wrote: post #169

unpopular42 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this was the case, it would make sense to charge for capacity, not for usage. Like, if you ever want to use more than X amps of electricity, you have to pay for upgraded wires and stuff. Doesn't explain charging less for first X units per month.

People expect to be charged for amount used, not capacity, so changing it is very hard.

See the OP. They are not charged the amount used. They are charged some weird function of amount used, the rate it was used at, and their home size.

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#183

Post by jMyles » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:17 PM UTC

acdha wrote: post #166

ryanlol wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get lots of bitcoin payments. >10 years into Bitcoin there's still no reason for someone to buy in other than speculation This is simply completely wrong, perhaps you should research the subject a little bit more.

Perhaps you could list a legal reason — not the marketing pitch we've all seen for the last decade but something where it makes financial sense to favor it? I’m not saying it can’t be used but just that there aren’t many reasons other than speculation or an ideological stance. If I was, say, the corner coffee shop what would balance out the extra fees, delays, and lack of fraud protection?

What's the obsession with needing a legal reason? Why do people reject the illegal but interesting uses? Doesn't the fact that bitcoin has managed to subvert drug prohibition for many people make clear that it is capable of interesting things?

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#184

Post by 549362-30499 » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:20 PM UTC

russdpale wrote: post #155

krrrh wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook and Snap became part of most people’s lives within a few years. Bitcoin has been around for 10, and aside from trading bitcoin, has found very limited use. That’s what makes it different. Every prediction for what Bitcoin would be good for, and what would justify its price has failed to come to fruition.

I believe Venezuela proves you completely wrong. You should read up on what is going on there with Bitcoin. What Satoshi envisioned is actually happening there. The fact that bitcoin has gone 10 years, with limited use, to me signals just how amazing the technology is. Ten years is nothing for a tech that can last 1000 (or more..).

What's going on in Venezuela with Bitcoin? From googling, it sounds like a small fraction of the population is setting up mining operations because electricity is subsidized enough to make it profitable. But I'm not finding anything describing significant adoption of Bitcoin as a currency.

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#185

Post by SimbaOnSteroids » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:23 PM UTC

slivym wrote: post #64

bdcravens wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realize it's easy to speak in a derogatory manner about something we don't like and hope it will go away, but I think that ignores the reality: for now, and for several years, a lot of people have made a lot of money. It may be an opportunity, or it may be a problem that needs addressing, but after 9+ years, I think there comes a point where it's no longer a sinkhole.

I think that is a really bad line of logic. There are lots of things that have been around for a long time and make some people plenty of money that are bad things. Pyramid schemes fit your definition - should I start buying in? The opposite way to pose this is: Cryptocurrencies have been around for 9+ years, and there has been literally 0 use for it apart from conning rubes on the internet. The important thing to as…

>What purpose does cryptocurrency serve beyond enriching people who are already invested.

Limited scope and obviously doesn't justify the money that is swirling in crypto right now.

However, if we want digital things to be non-fungible we're probably going to need something like a block chain. Cryptokitties(as beanie-baby-esque as they are) and the implementation of the ERC-271 token come to mind.

Again I realize cryptokittes are not really a great example other than proof of concept, but imagine with me for a second a fine art market where all the art is digital, this requires a decentralized non-fungible token, maybe digital house or car keys would be another thing where we want to limit the number of people with access to the thing, again if we don't want to trust someone like say equifax, with control over that we're going to want a decentralized non-fungible token.

I realize these aren't necessarily the best examples of non-fungible assets we might want one day. However it seems absurd to me that moving forward society won't at some point demand some digital asset that is non-fungible. If that assumption holds true then some form of cypto-currency is going to be necessary to provide such an asset.

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#186

Post by justherefortart » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:23 PM UTC

mmaunder wrote: post #133

mindfulplay wrote: post #33

It's hard to explain the levels of stupidity in this. - people trading 'coins' in the same way Pokemon / WWF kids trade cards. - thinking this is actually a long-term 'investment' strategy (well its idiots trading with each other ...) - to top it off, siphoning off electricity and giving a load of shitty excuses 'it could be like Seattle's. I don't know where to begin with this Bitcoin crap; it's gotten crazy that so…

But... but, its math, and new. So it must be cool. Right? Plus when they talk about it they get to say 'crypto' which sounds hackeresque. Humans are hilarious. Anyone here old enough to remember the dot-com boom with absurd business models, that, when questioned, got the response that you obviously just don't 'get it'. Proof of energy consuming work as currency is a sure path to environmental catastrophe.

Cryptocurrencies are the pet rock or beanie babies of today.

It's just on a larger scale of stupidity.

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#187

Post by notatoad » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:28 PM UTC

rdiddly wrote: post #131

notatoad wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how does that sort of regulation actually work? You can obviously have a personal computer. surely you can have a few computers. at what point does the government say you have too many computers?

"The government" probably doesn't say it; people who are negatively impacted or forced to take on extra risk because of mining activity are the ones to say something. For example, the electricity provider probably objects precisely when the current you're drawing exceeds the safe limits of their equipment and wiring. If they're particularly on the ball, they at least come investigate as soon as they notice an unusual…

>"The government" probably doesn't say it;

The comment I was replying to specifically says they do...

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#188

Post by bradleyjg » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:28 PM UTC

beagle3 wrote: post #174

acdha wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that the Internet had clear useful applications at that point and billions of dollars in real business (not just speculation) was happening annually. Yes, there were plenty VC misfires with no plausible path to profitability — my favorite was cement.com, with free shipping! — but there were tons of existing businesses finding significant value from it and new companies like Amazon, eBay, Travelocity…

Bitcoin, at this point in time (and for the last two years or so, though not really for the preceding eight) is digital gold. It's a version of gold that, with proper preparation, can be carried inside your head when you move from place to place, or transferred by voice or text message. Most people in the west have about the same use for gold[0] and bitcoin - speculation, gamble, "investment". However, people of Vene…

Everything you say about bitcoin is equally true of a bank account in pounds in London. There’s zero reason in principle that it is any harder or easier for an oppressive government to prevent capital outflows to bitcoin than to British bank accounts. At very best there’s a temporary advantage in bitcoin’s favor as oppressive governments take time to understand and lock down the newer avenues for evading their controls.

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#189

Post by josu » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:36 PM UTC

bradleyjg wrote: post #188

beagle3 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin, at this point in time (and for the last two years or so, though not really for the preceding eight) is digital gold. It's a version of gold that, with proper preparation, can be carried inside your head when you move from place to place, or transferred by voice or text message. Most people in the west have about the same use for gold[0] and bitcoin - speculation, gamble, "investment". However, people of Vene…

Everything you say about bitcoin is equally true of a bank account in pounds in London. There’s zero reason in principle that it is any harder or easier for an oppressive government to prevent capital outflows to bitcoin than to British bank accounts. At very best there’s a temporary advantage in bitcoin’s favor as oppressive governments take time to understand and lock down the newer avenues for evading their contro…

While you are right, and this is a common practice among wealthy individuals, it's virtually impossible for most people in those countries to open bank accounts abroad.

Re: Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ stress power grids in Central Washington

#190

Post by acdha » Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:39 PM UTC

asenna wrote: post #179

acdha wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that the Internet had clear useful applications at that point and billions of dollars in real business (not just speculation) was happening annually. Yes, there were plenty VC misfires with no plausible path to profitability — my favorite was cement.com, with free shipping! — but there were tons of existing businesses finding significant value from it and new companies like Amazon, eBay, Travelocity…

> 10 years into Bitcoin there's still no reason for someone to buy in other than speculation If you're comparing with the Internet, I'd say 10 years is still quite early into the Bitcoin and Blockchain space. You could say the Internet of 1999 was almost 15-20 years of development from the time TCP/IP was introduced on the ARPANET. With the attention that Blockchain has received in the past year and the sheer number…

I don't think that does anything other than make the comparison worse for Bitcoin: while it's technically true that the Internet started well before 1989, what was popular in 1999 was the web and that really wasn't mainstream before 1993 or so when e.g. Mosaic was released but by 1995-6 it was having significant impacts around the world in most fields.

More interestingly, however, is that Internet was difficult to get and expensive throughout most of that period, not to mention the slow and expensive connection speeds of that era, all of which limited adoption substantially. Even with those barriers to adoption, however, there was plenty of demand because it was immediately useful to have email, Usenet (at least in technical fields), FTP, etc. even before the explosion of activity around the web. When the web boomed, millions of people paid (often by the minute) to surf it at 56K or less.

In contrast, Bitcoin has been available to almost anyone on the Internet for many years without anything like those barriers to adoption but most people haven't had a reason to care.