The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban • Hacker News Board

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#281

Post by tome » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

saalweachter wrote: post #265

tome wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> mining gold certainly has an environmental impact Can you quantify the environmental impact of gold mining? How does it compare to the CO2 output of a medium-sized country?

Looks like 0.8 tonnes / troy oz? https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights... Given 3000 tons of gold mined per year, that should be roughly 70 megatons of CO2 / year. [I am pleased to report that this falls squarely in my previous estimate of 30-150 megatons / year that was based on the cost to mine gold, the cost of fuel, and the CO2 emitted by fuel.]

- Fossil CO2 Emissions (2016) 35,753 megatons globally

- so gold mining is 0.2% of global CO2 emissions!?

- Bitcoin mining energy use is at least 78TWh annually

- 480-500g of carbon dioxide produced for every kWh consumed

- So mining bitcoin produces 40 megatons of CO2 per year, which is the same order of magnitude of gold mining.

- And mining bitcoin is 0.1% of global CO2 emissions

(I would be grateful if someone would check my calculation)

References:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/10/bitcoin-r...

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#282

Post by lmilcin » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

djoldman wrote: post #275

There is a horrific waste of resources devastating the environment that has gone on for far too long without detection. Hundreds of thousands of computer servers running almost 24/7, hundreds of thousands of people driving to work, burning energy on their development machines. Hundreds of billions of dollars spent on making products (and wasting energy) to support this industry, which then must be transported, wastin…

I think people just don't appreciate how much energy is being wasted for bitcoin mining.

Bitcoin mining currently uses 10x the amount of power used by Google and 50% of what ALL DATACENTERS IN THE WORLD are using.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56215787

This also means that our efforts to replace non-renewable sources of energy are being wasted as we are just adding capacity to bitcoin mining network. When you are paying your taxes and subsidize "green" energy know that part of your subsidy just goes to shit.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#283

Post by lvs » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:15 PM UTC

Kranar wrote: post #264

lvs wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure anyone in this thread knows what inflation is. If the cost of housing rises, that is inflationary against all other fungible assets that could be used to purchase housing. That is, one requires a larger quantity of all assets -- dollars, crypto, stocks, bodily fluids, etc. -- to acquire a roof over one's head. Only if the cost to purchase housing is somehow lower by holding value in a particular asset co…

Inflation as it's being used in this conversation and in general is measured against a specific currency. I mean you could, I suppose, use the term to measure the cost of a specific asset against a basket of other assets, but that is not really standard and if you wish to use it that way you should qualify your usage as such to avoid confusion. Using your approach you'd end up saying something like Apple is experienc…

The only thing you said that is true is in the last sentence. The basket of goods affecting inflation is heavily influenced by the cost of housing. All you care about when holding a store of value is how much of that denominated fungible asset can be exchanged for things you need to live.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#284

Post by chriselles » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:16 PM UTC

Isn’t cryptocurrency fundamentally about real or perceived lack of equity and trust?

Isn’t the real aspirational promise of cryptocurrency really just a container that will retain the purchasing power of your savings with low friction?

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#285

Post by djoldman » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:19 PM UTC

lmilcin wrote: post #282

djoldman wrote: post #275

There is a horrific waste of resources devastating the environment that has gone on for far too long without detection. Hundreds of thousands of computer servers running almost 24/7, hundreds of thousands of people driving to work, burning energy on their development machines. Hundreds of billions of dollars spent on making products (and wasting energy) to support this industry, which then must be transported, wastin…

I think people just don't appreciate how much energy is being wasted for bitcoin mining. Bitcoin mining currently uses 10x the amount of power used by Google and 50% of what ALL DATACENTERS IN THE WORLD are using. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56215787 This also means that our efforts to replace non-renewable sources of energy are being wasted as we are just adding capacity to bitcoin mining network. W…

I think you're right, it's difficult to imagine the scale.

Let's also look at something else: the US department of defense:

"...The U.S. military also produced more greenhouse gases than Morocco, Peru, Hungary, Finland, New Zealand and Norway. According to the research from Brown University, the Pentagon would be the world's 55th largest CO2 emitter if it was a country..." [0]

I think reasonable people could disagree as to whether or not all those emissions were worth it. The point is that many people think the U.S. military is by and large a complete waste of resources analogous to the waste of the Bitcoin network.

If we're going to condemn Bitcoin, let's condemn all the other resource and energy wastes out there.

[0]https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/06/13/report...

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#286

Post by thro7654 » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:21 PM UTC

api wrote: post #225

louwrentius wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think whataboutism is actually the real shitty thing here. Yes, I think there is a lot wrong within ‘Wall Street’. But those wrongs don’t justify the existence of cryptocurrencies in any way. And most of all: it doesn’t absolve cryptocurrencies in any way of their terrible impact on our world. Just the facilating of cryprolocker attacks alone are enough to justify a ban in my view.

It's not whataboutism. It's hypocrisy. It's deeply hypocritical to attack cryptocurrency when we have a massive parasitic financial industry that does far more damage than anything cryptocurrency has ever done. For just one example, look at how hedge fund and foreign capital speculation in housing is making a home unaffordable for millions upon millions of people and contributing to middle class decline and homelessn…

Whataboutism is about hypocrisy.

Argument: X is bad because Y. Counter: But Z is also bad because Y and I don't hear you saying anything about that! Conclusion: So X isn't bad.

E.g. the typical Soviet whataboutism:

Argument: The USSR doesn't respect human rights and that's bad. Counter: A u vas negrov linchuyut (but at your place, you lynch negroes). I.e. the US doesn't respect human rights either. Conclusion: So the USSR isn't bad.

The mere presence of Z does not invalidate the argument that X is bad because of Y. It's irrelevant, which is why tu quoque is just that, a fallacy of relevance.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#287

Post by lmilcin » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:22 PM UTC

DickingAround wrote: post #53

This article seems to intentionally ignore the core reason for cryptocurrencies; escaping inflation and control. The article then proposes to use the law to bring those people back within the control of fiat and government oversight. I no longer think the environmental argument is really plausible here. Clearly crypto mining is emitting using a lot of power and some of that is CO2. But the competition is fiat; backed…

There is no "core" reason for cryptocurrencies. This is romantic bullshit perpetuated by people invested in it.

The reality is, as I have predicted long ago, if bitcoin becomes large portion of worlds financial flow it will just be taken over by financial institutions and perverted for their use.

These guys have much more experience at this (ie subverting financial systems) than you can imagine.

Bitcoin is not going to stop wars and bring law and order.

If bitcoin was supposed to be the safest method to move funds around then why people have higher chance of loosing their bitcoin for various reasons than almost any other kind of equity?

You are just naive.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#288

Post by JumpCrisscross » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:22 PM UTC

tome wrote: post #247

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody will stop me from trading my GOOG share for a goat, or a baseball card, if I so choose. Nitpick, but the SEC would object to that. That said, American securities regulation has a unique philosophy, i.e. every securities trade must be registered and follow a narrow book of rules unless specifically exempted. Your broader point, of financial and real assets being proven hedges against inflation, stands.

The transaction must be denominated in dollars, but must dollars actually change hands? I don't think so. Companies buy other companies with stock issues all the time.

> transaction must be denominated in dollars, but must dollars actually change hands?

I believe it's the other way around. It can be denominated in anything, but trading e.g. the deed to your house for some Apple stock is a no no. (Doesn't have to be U.S. dollars, though.)

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#289

Post by Kranar » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:23 PM UTC

lvs wrote: post #283

Kranar wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inflation as it's being used in this conversation and in general is measured against a specific currency. I mean you could, I suppose, use the term to measure the cost of a specific asset against a basket of other assets, but that is not really standard and if you wish to use it that way you should qualify your usage as such to avoid confusion. Using your approach you'd end up saying something like Apple is experienc…

The only thing you said that is true is in the last sentence. The basket of goods affecting inflation is heavily influenced by the cost of housing. All you care about when holding a store of value is how much of that denominated fungible asset can be exchanged for things you need to live.

Ah, so according to you my first sentence is false then? Let's see what a simple Google search yields:

>Inflation is the decrease in the purchasing power of a currency.

>Inflation is the decline of purchasing power of a given currency over time.

>Inflation is a persistent rise in the average level of prices over time in a given currency.

> Inflation occurs when prices rise, decreasing the purchasing power of your dollars.

Those are literally the top search results for "inflation" when I Google the term. Now certainly your Google search for that term may differ from mine and you are certainly welcome to share your findings. Until then I will rest satisfied that my first sentence expressing that inflation is almost always understood to be with respect to a currency is also true.

Re: The political case for a blanket cryptocurrency ban

#290

Post by lmilcin » Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 6:24 PM UTC

djoldman wrote: post #285

lmilcin wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people just don't appreciate how much energy is being wasted for bitcoin mining. Bitcoin mining currently uses 10x the amount of power used by Google and 50% of what ALL DATACENTERS IN THE WORLD are using. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56215787 This also means that our efforts to replace non-renewable sources of energy are being wasted as we are just adding capacity to bitcoin mining network. W…

I think you're right, it's difficult to imagine the scale. Let's also look at something else: the US department of defense: "...The U.S. military also produced more greenhouse gases than Morocco, Peru, Hungary, Finland, New Zealand and Norway. According to the research from Brown University, the Pentagon would be the world's 55th largest CO2 emitter if it was a country..." [0] I think reasonable people could disagree…

If you think bitcoin will cause military to go away you are naive in the extreme.

Military is there because we don't know how to do better.

Just like democracy is a shit show of inefficiency but we just have not figured out better system of government yet.

But we know how to transfer money without burning huge amount of energy and that is the point.