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

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

#271

Post by dvlsg » Tue, May 29, 2018, 5:02 PM UTC

dahdum wrote: post #130

dvlsg wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find myself hoping it implodes sooner rather than later. Purely selfish on my part - but I would like to be able to buy a new graphics card some day. I'm already dreading the insane scramble when Nvidia announces their new cards (likely this summer).

Crypto and the AI boom are funneling money to Nvidia for R&D and to ramp up production. If you want advancement in graphics cards to come more quickly, it’s not a bad trend.

I _do_ want advancement to come more quickly - but I also want to have access to those benefits.

Hopefully both can be achieved.

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

#272

Post by Rjevski » Tue, May 29, 2018, 5:56 PM UTC

tw04 wrote: post #265

Rjevski wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then maybe they shouldn’t be oversubscribing, or finally upgrade the infrastructure now that they milked out enough money from the oversubscription and the energy consumption is finally catching up. Another solution is to make a proper “burstable” tariff with the corresponding meter that would give you a baseline current allowance plus a peak current allowance for X seconds. As it stands however they are selling pack…

Right, 100 years of service that works perfectly fine should be thrown out the window. The rest of us should all pay a 10x increase so Bitcoin miners can abuse the system. And oh, btw, when the 10x increase occurs, the Bitcoin miners won't be able to afford it, so we'll have a glut of unused power that we'll all have to eat the cost of. Brilliant idea.

Do you mean you are happy with being sold a tariff promising X amps while cutting you off when you do use those X amps?

Look, I dislike Bitcoin too, but what I dislike even more is companies making money promising X and then actually cutting you off should you dare to use that X. At the moment, the "miners" are paying for an energy tariff that promises them X and are using X; the fact they're using it on Bitcoin is completely irrelevant, the problem is that a company is making money on false promises and somehow the buyer is the one at fault?

We've already got this bullshit with "unlimited" data, let's not set a precedent by tolerating this for energy tariffs. If the grid can't sustain everyone using 100 amps then they shouldn't be selling 100 amp tariffs and should switch to "burstable" tariffs with a continuous allowance of let's say 50 amps and a "burst" allowance of 100 amps for X seconds.

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

#273

Post by stordoff » Tue, May 29, 2018, 5:57 PM UTC

syshum wrote: post #234

stordoff wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It being "in the privacy of their own home" isn't sufficient to say that the government shouldn't regulate it -- there are good reasons for certain activities to be regulated (that's not to say the government should be able to regulate ALL activities). I can run a sewage treatment plant next door to you in the privacy of my own home, but I doubt you'd be happy with it, and the same is true here--there are externaliti…

>>I can run a sewage treatment plant next door to you in the privacy of my own home, Aside from this hyperbolic statement being completely unfeasible and moronic on its face, provided there is not clear, articulable danger to my person or my propery you should be allowed to do anything you want on your property, including running BitCoin Miners. if you cross into posing a direct and articulable danger to others then…

> provided there is not clear, articulable danger to my person or my propery you should be allowed to do anything you want on your property, including running BitCoin Miners.

Which is why I went on the clear negatives that it poses.

> do you support zoning regulation on this like color of the home, if you have a garden on your front yard, the type and height of grass (or mandates that you have grass)

No, but I was not arguing that the government _should_ be able to regulate _everything_, but that when negative effects can be identified, "it is in the privacy of my own home" is not enough to counter that -- the negative effects spread beyond your home, and detrimentally effect others (in a concrete way, not just that it is something they don't like).

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

#274

Post by therealdrag0 » Wed, May 30, 2018, 5:34 PM UTC

ldayley wrote: post #25

JamisonM wrote: post #10

Subsidising energy prices for local consumers based on export revenues is widely practiced but is bad policy. The utilities should charge market rates for consumption and cut local rate-payers a cheque annually using a scheme that encourages energy saving practices.

Crypro-miners are taking advantage of the same asymmetries that the FAANG data centers enjoy. They were built in those same areas of WA/OR for the same reasons. They just don’t use as much power as mining rigs...

They also are less volatile and have steady growth and long-term contractual commitments, that the article mentioned the utilities seeking.

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

#275

Post by therealdrag0 » Wed, May 30, 2018, 5:39 PM UTC

apo wrote: post #108

Hanging over May’s hearing was the fate of the Basin’s last big electrical customer: the Alcoa aluminum smelter, which employed more than 400 workers before it was idled several years ago thanks to competition from cheaper Chinese imports. Cryptocurrency mining won’t replace all those jobs — the process is heavily automated. But backers insist that a local mining sector, if allowed to grow, will attract other ancilla…

It's just a part of our culture that speculators are looked down upon. They appear to be "predatory" and not produce anything of value. A manufacturer on the other hand, it is clear that it produces things that are valued by society at large. Similar reasons wall-street gets all the hate-er-aide.

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

#276

Post by russdpale » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 10:07 PM UTC

paulgb wrote: post #216

russdpale wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all wrong. Many people receive payments and pay in bitcoin. All without having to trust some centralized oracle that cannot, at the end of the day, be trusted. Take a look at what is happening in Venezuela with bitcoin, and you will see why your statement is wrong. The fact bitcoin, an open source project, continues to flourish with some of the brightest minds in computer science ten years after its foundatio…

> Take a look at what is happening in Venezuela with bitcoin Is anybody actually using Bitcoin as a currency in Venezuela? I can only find references to people mining excessively there because the electricity is so subsidized.

Yes, reports of people paying rent, for school fees, etc. Plenty of use as a currency going on.

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

#277

Post by russdpale » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 11:14 PM UTC

erubin wrote: post #178

russdpale wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it isn't a stupid as you think? Perhaps people like the idea of trading computational power for social mobility? If your computer could do your work for you, leaving you to do whatever you want in life, why would you NOT want that? The stupidity is that we are not all doing this, that we are not tearing down the halls of congress for cheaper power collection methods. What is crazy is that we never demand acco…

ultimately real work that produces actual goods and services has to get done. how does computing hashes "do all your work for you, leaving you to do whatever you want in life"

Yes, the computer crunches the transactions, and you get rewarded in bitcoin. Why should Visa be the only to profit from something like this?

So this leaves me to do what I want. I can get another job, or not. Who wouldn't want this? Its a simple idea, trade computation for social mobility. There are people doing this all over Venezuela right now.

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

#278

Post by tw04 » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 7:15 PM UTC

Rjevski wrote: post #272

tw04 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, 100 years of service that works perfectly fine should be thrown out the window. The rest of us should all pay a 10x increase so Bitcoin miners can abuse the system. And oh, btw, when the 10x increase occurs, the Bitcoin miners won't be able to afford it, so we'll have a glut of unused power that we'll all have to eat the cost of. Brilliant idea.

Do you mean you are happy with being sold a tariff promising X amps while cutting you off when you do use those X amps? Look, I dislike Bitcoin too, but what I dislike even more is companies making money promising X and then actually cutting you off should you dare to use that X. At the moment, the "miners" are paying for an energy tariff that promises them X and are using X; the fact they're using it on Bitcoin is c…

>Do you mean you are happy with being sold a tariff promising X amps while cutting you off when you do use those X amps?

I'm going to assume you don't live in the US, or haven't ever actually built a new house. You are absolutely not promised the full usage 100% of the time. And they're very clear about that. It's why you must hire a licensed electrician to fill out a load sheet before they'll put a shovel in the ground or a ladder in the air to run service to your premises.

I'm not sure why you keep claiming that, but there isn't a power company in the US that had EVER promised a residential Customer that they could use 100% of the rated line all the time.