Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

stephendiehl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 630 posts

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#41

Post by cryptochamorro »

No one blames fiat for the destruction of entire countries and assassinations of leaders who tried to get away from being beholden to X financial system.

Money drives people to do insane things. Governments only care about the environment insofar as to stay in power and to keep their citizens from interrupting their gravy train.

Look at the numerous examples politicians using “green” initiatives to line their own pockets.

Attacking cryptocurrency is in their best interest because they can’t control it. Full stop.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#42

Post by fisf »

herodotus wrote: post #20
mantenpanther wrote: post #6

Hostile and clearly framed article from the first sentence. Could not read it further.

I am sorry that you did that. I believe that Bitcoin's intrinsic energy usage is a big big problem, and I would have been interested in a reasoned counter-argument from someone who is in favour of Bitcoin or other crypto-currencies. After all, I read HN mostly to learn and grow. I especially enjoy informative comments on articles and the ensuing debates.

The easiest counter argument to that is that transition to proof-of-stake based Crypto should be encouraged.

But the article only makes sweeping statements without much depth. .

"Cryptocurrencies disproportionately victimize vulnerable people and those in marginalized communities without access to traditional investments or financial advisory"

The same could be said about large segments of the traditional finance and banking industry. Yet nobody wants a blanket ban of this sector.

It is a very low effort article, that has a very clear bias.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#43

Post by christiansakai »

slibhb wrote: post #32
_nckn wrote: post #5

I think the main premise of this article is the fact that crypto's carbon emission is insane, especially Bitcoin, which I agree (I don't hold Bitcoin for this exact reason). But there are many other crypto that uses Proof of Stake, way way greener than Proof of Work, such as Cardano. Even Ethereum is transitioning to Proof of Stake. This article should be re-titled "The Political Case for a Blanket Proof of Work Ban"…

The main premise of the article is that cryptocurrencies are "speculation for speculation’s sake," i.e. gambling, and that's bad. Also, the article claims that they contribute to inequality. The green stuff is basically a side note. I don't think it's a terribly strong case but I suppose it depends on whether you agree that crypto is gambling and if you think gambling should banned. Anyway, I think lots of people stu…

In conclusion, none of the points addressed in this article hold strong ground.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#44

Post by purple_ferret »

_nckn wrote: post #5

I think the main premise of this article is the fact that crypto's carbon emission is insane, especially Bitcoin, which I agree (I don't hold Bitcoin for this exact reason). But there are many other crypto that uses Proof of Stake, way way greener than Proof of Work, such as Cardano. Even Ethereum is transitioning to Proof of Stake. This article should be re-titled "The Political Case for a Blanket Proof of Work Ban"…

There are many problems with Proof of Stake (inflation, centralization, etc). Cardano mainnet doesn't even exist yet. Smoke and mirrors.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#45

Post by flaque »

spaced-out wrote: post #29
mmastrac wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government[0] has regulatory authority over environmental issues, so why wouldn't this be the government's job? [0] ie: all of them

If the government is able to ban crypto currency because it's unnecessary and uses too much energy, couldn't they apply that logic to nearly any other modern luxury?

They do! Gas taxes, bans of gas vehicles, required emission standards, etc.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#47

Post by pushrax »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #23

Most of the article's arguments work if you replace the word "Gold" for the word cryptocurrency. Gold itself is just a yellow metal, it is valuable largely for the human belief that it has value, though admittedly it is somewhat pretty, a good conductor of electrons, and has historical value due to its ease of work and use in numerous ancient artifacts. Still, as a currency or value holder, gold is simply a metal tha…

Gold mining is also environmentally intensive, as is transporting gold for trade.

Proof of stake is also a "mining" operation insofar as it produces a limited supply at a macro-predictable rate.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#48

Post by BitwiseFool »

thebean11 wrote: post #25
mmastrac wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government[0] has regulatory authority over environmental issues, so why wouldn't this be the government's job? [0] ie: all of them

Banning crypto is a gigantic overreach when the government won't even try the obvious solutions like carbon taxes (which would indirectly discourage crypto mining).

I see the situation in the exact opposite way. Passing a Carbon Tax, while sensible, would run in major opposition because it would basically effect every citizen. But banning cryptocurrency would be much easier since the majority of the population doesn't own any and it can be framed in very positive terms.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#49

Post by jtolds »

christiansakai wrote: post #30
jtolds wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came here to say this exact same thing. There is seriously interesting and useful real work being done under the umbrella term "decentralized finance" or DeFi. It is hard to cut through the noise of get rich quick schemes, but at the core, the DeFi stuff, built on top of green cryptocurrency (proof of stake), along with quickly improving zero-knowledge proof tech, is actually useful and groundbreaking. Bitcoin and…

Indeed, the world of cyptocurrency/blockchain research has many ground breaking papers and news are often real time, even crypto news aggregator can't keep up with it. HN crowd refuses to care about it because of bad taste of crypto in general.

It's a bummer because zkRollups and their ilk in particular are flat out amazing new cryptographic constructions, but because they weren't developed by Schneier or Rivest or DJB, the wider programming industry is ignoring them.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#50

Post by christiansakai »

purple_ferret wrote: post #44
_nckn wrote: post #5

I think the main premise of this article is the fact that crypto's carbon emission is insane, especially Bitcoin, which I agree (I don't hold Bitcoin for this exact reason). But there are many other crypto that uses Proof of Stake, way way greener than Proof of Work, such as Cardano. Even Ethereum is transitioning to Proof of Stake. This article should be re-titled "The Political Case for a Blanket Proof of Work Ban"…

There are many problems with Proof of Stake (inflation, centralization, etc). Cardano mainnet doesn't even exist yet. Smoke and mirrors.

That remains to be seen. Ethereum has their own way of solving PoS weakness and Cardano has their own way. You need to read more.
Post reply on HN