Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US • Hacker News Board

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#291

Post by noxer » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:38 PM UTC

BenoitEssiambre wrote: post #285

noxer wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry it IS defensively self correcting no matter who joins and for what reason. To keep it going forever it would need endless quadratic grows which is not possible. Also there are solutions without PoW/PoS, they use FBA instead. As soon as they take over for any actual use, the energy wasting will come to an end.

I mean, it _is_ going to eventually self correct. The question is, could it go on until causing another great depression and wwIII before it does?

If it would have anywhere near a direct effect on our daily life that alone would have such a negative effect on the price that it would instantly crash. The price and more so the ever increasing price is the only thing that keeps it alive and it directly correlates with the price expectation people have. There is no way enough people would think the price goes up if negative effects would become so real.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#292

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:39 PM UTC

GavinMcG wrote: post #232

trident5000 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could make up some fear mongering "study" about almost every energy using topic. AI and video rendering for instance which is often for some marginal purpose. Or heating pools, idle electronics, big homes with AC, leisure travel, all the useless crap bought and manufactured in China with dirty coal, etc.

Are you saying we shouldn't understand the consequences of what we do? It's useful to know that BTC has major externalities because it allows us to make a rational choice. We could make different choices about all the things you listed, too. Or not! But you seem to be actually arguing for willful blindness, here.

[deleted]

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#293

Post by BTCOG » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:39 PM UTC

_red wrote: post #10

As opposed to fiat, which funds war and enormous waste via unrestrained printing....

And social media datacenters that are ruining democracy, causing thousands of suicides per year, using far more power, and causing plenty of mental illnesses/depression.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#294

Post by newsclues » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:42 PM UTC

throwaway20875 wrote: post #206

newsclues wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is the resource cost of crypto but also an opportunity cost. Given all the smart minds and money devoted to crypto research, could humanity not benefit from other projects?

Talent invested in the crypto space pales in comparison to what we waste in finance. Our greatest minds are more likely to be arbitraging pork belly futures (PrIcE dIsCoVeRy!) than working on crypto.

I’m all for not wasting talent on wasteful projects, be it crypto or finance.

But wasting talent in finance isn’t a justification to waste talent in crypto.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#295

Post by nyolfen » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:44 PM UTC

karpour wrote: post #258

nyolfen wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the petrodollar system is built on US military hegemony, with that military being the largest fossil fuel consuming entity in the largest fossil fuel consuming nation -- "the largest single institutional consumer of hydrocarbons in the world"[1], towards the end of making sure people buy oil with dollars. in a very real sense the value of the dollar is maintained by the fact that people have to buy oil with it. crypt…

Great whataboutism, 10/10

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#296

Post by douglaswlance » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:46 PM UTC

ath92 wrote: post #12

eigenvalue wrote: post #6

This is about the furthest thing from “science”. Just sensationalist propaganda. It’s so far from being even remotely plausible. Maybe 1 BTC is responsible for $0.49 of “damage” if you could ever actually quantify it. Most of this electricity comes from the cheapest source of power, which is hydro.

Energy is not an infinite resource. The energy used to mine bitcoin could have been used for something else instead.

All of humanity uses the energy equivalent of ~50 lbs of matter each day.

There's way more energy available to us than biological humans will ever use.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#297

Post by shawnz » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:48 PM UTC

Kye wrote: post #205

fullstop wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear what you're saying, but it's not nearly as "narrow" as you suggest. Remittances from the United States total hundreds of billions of US dollars each year [1]. Even with what I feel are bloated fees associated with Bitcoin, it is vastly cheaper than other services like Western Union. 1. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/interactives/remittance-f...

The concern here is power use vs. utility relative to other options, not price. By cost I meant the cost under discussion: environmental and health. How much energy do remittance services use to move an equivalent amount of money? What about the cost to health and the environment?

The utility isn't solely measured by the amount of money a financial service can move, or the amount of transactions it can process.

If that were true, Western Union would obviously have less utility than Visa. But actually, WU and Visa solve totally different problems with different risks associated, so it doesn't make sense to compare them in that way.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#298

Post by douglaswlance » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:49 PM UTC

karpour wrote: post #250

douglaswlance wrote: post #62

Why are there so many articles attacking crypto across the web as of late?

Because people finally realize the massive impact on the environment that Bitcoin has? You can say "f** it, I don't care", but you can't deny just how much energy the Bitcoin network uses (or wastes, imho) Bitcoin and other proof-of-work crypto comes with a price. And the price is environmental.

Not all usage of energy is equivalent. It requires energy to run carbon scrubbers, yet we would probably agree that carbon scrubbers are worth the energy costs for environmental benefits.

Can you prove that the energy bitcoin miners use would have been put to a more environmentally friendly use if they had not existed?

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#299

Post by falcolas » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

_Microft wrote: post #241

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is not just some article, it's a peer-reviewed study from the University of Arizona. When junk science is peer-reviewed, it's even more of a problem.

Sure, but how do you tell that this is "junk science" as you call it?

Perhaps it disagrees with their personal worldview, because it would make their Bitcoin investment a questionable move for the world. There's a lot of justification going on around people's bitcoin investments; you can't say a negative thing about it right now without being dogpiled.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#300

Post by BenoitEssiambre » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

noxer wrote: post #291

BenoitEssiambre wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it _is_ going to eventually self correct. The question is, could it go on until causing another great depression and wwIII before it does?

If it would have anywhere near a direct effect on our daily life that alone would have such a negative effect on the price that it would instantly crash. The price and more so the ever increasing price is the only thing that keeps it alive and it directly correlates with the price expectation people have. There is no way enough people would think the price goes up if negative effects would become so real.

What if the effects of cryptocoins are expected to affect other assets more negatively (people reduce buying from businesses because they want to hoard tokens instead so all assets but cryptocoins lose value while tokens are gaining). Then cryptocoins increasingly seems like the only asset worth buying. This is what makes this a bad Nash equilibrium and vicious circle.

Now I think central banks can prevent this from affecting the greater economy by sufficiently stimulating investment (which would quickly push crypto coins prices up to a level where they can go down again). I think...