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

Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

sciencedirect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 177 posts

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#141

Post by satronaut »

thehappypm wrote: post #91
nk1tz wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The beautiful thing about Bitcoin is that is it a pure, global, free market writ large. There is absolutely nothing you can do to prevent individuals from choosing to participate in it. Therefore the correct retort to someone like you is to tell you to "cry harder".

This isn't correct, though. If I decide to start an anti-Bitcoin political movement, I can get leaders elected who can ban the use of Bitcoin in the USA. Sure, some motivated folks will use VPNs and the like, but cutting the general public off from Bitcoin would be devastating. Then who will be crying?

lol, try and ban bitcoin

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#142

Post by palijer »

morbia wrote: post #27
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #19

Completely pales next to something as egregious as disposable tech that sells in the millions and only has a lifespan of 2 years tops like AirPods. They will still be washing up on beaches 100 years after every single person involved in their design has passed. Whole electronics industry needs to take this stuff more seriously, we need more replaceable batteries and storage, right to repair on a global level and laws…

On those lines, a company I'm very much been keeping an eye on is framework https://frame.work/ I've wanted something like this for years, a laptop that is actually repairable but isn't awful in specs or ergonomics. When they start selling in my region I'll be all over it. If you care about these problems then vote with your wallet.

The LTT videos on them are great. Extra screws in the case, colour coded to prevent long screw damage, QR codes on everything as well.

I'm way too excited about this company, it's all the changes I've been hoping for.

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#143

Post by k4rli »

hbag wrote: post #110
easymovet wrote: post #99

HackedNews has a growing Bitcoin FUD problem. Seriously biased news source, none of the benefits of Bitcoin ever get reported on here.

my favourite benefit of bitcoin is how it uses the entire energy output of yemen to send someone five bucks

My favorite benefit is paying $10 in transaction fees for five bucks and then having to wait hours for confirmations.

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#144

Post by mrmuagi »

Imnimo wrote: post #123
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #19

Completely pales next to something as egregious as disposable tech that sells in the millions and only has a lifespan of 2 years tops like AirPods. They will still be washing up on beaches 100 years after every single person involved in their design has passed. Whole electronics industry needs to take this stuff more seriously, we need more replaceable batteries and storage, right to repair on a global level and laws…

Google says there's been 100M AirPods produced, and that each airpod weighs 4g, plus 38g for the case, so 46g total. That's 4.6 metric kiltons of airpods. The paper says that Bitcoin produces 30.7 metric kilotons of e-waste per year, so that's about 6.5 airpod-scale disasters every single year.

To be a bit more fair in the comparison (virtual vs physical), probally could account for shipping from manufacturer, to distributor, and then finally to the end user? It seems like that'd atleast tip the scales a little bit.

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#145

Post by Imnimo »

mrmuagi wrote: post #144
Imnimo wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google says there's been 100M AirPods produced, and that each airpod weighs 4g, plus 38g for the case, so 46g total. That's 4.6 metric kiltons of airpods. The paper says that Bitcoin produces 30.7 metric kilotons of e-waste per year, so that's about 6.5 airpod-scale disasters every single year.

To be a bit more fair in the comparison (virtual vs physical), probally could account for shipping from manufacturer, to distributor, and then finally to the end user? It seems like that'd atleast tip the scales a little bit.

I think the article is talking about waste in the form of ASICs used for mining that need to be constantly replaced with upgraded versions to remain profitable, so it's already physical vs. physical.

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#146

Post by Wingy »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #105
disruptalot wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using graphic cards to mine bitcoin became unprofitable about 10 years ago. The graphic card shortage can be linked to other cryptocurrencies.

Primarily Ethereum, which will hopefully be migrating away from proof of work (mining) in late 2021 / early 2022, so hopefully there will be an abundance of cheap second hand options (which will admittedly have lead hard lives), but also dramatically reduce the demand for new cards.

Graphics cards used for mining are generally maintained better than ones used for gaming because they are often undervolted and kept at 100% instead of cycling on/off.

> In some cases, steady GPU mining can be safer than gaming. When mining with a GPU, the load is evenly distributed over time; therefore, there are no thermal spikes and sudden drops that could damage the GPU.

https://www.nicehash.com/blog/post/can-mining-damage-my-gpu-...

Keep in mind that NiceHash is a GPU mining pool

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#147

Post by thehappypm »

satronaut wrote: post #141
thehappypm wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't correct, though. If I decide to start an anti-Bitcoin political movement, I can get leaders elected who can ban the use of Bitcoin in the USA. Sure, some motivated folks will use VPNs and the like, but cutting the general public off from Bitcoin would be devastating. Then who will be crying?

lol, try and ban bitcoin

Why would that be hard? It's used for tons of illegal activity (ransomware as an example).

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#148

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #19

Completely pales next to something as egregious as disposable tech that sells in the millions and only has a lifespan of 2 years tops like AirPods. They will still be washing up on beaches 100 years after every single person involved in their design has passed. Whole electronics industry needs to take this stuff more seriously, we need more replaceable batteries and storage, right to repair on a global level and laws…

> Completely pales next to something as egregious as disposable tech that sells in the millions and only has a lifespan of 2 years tops like AirPods.

Does it? Assuming the claim is accurate, 30700 metric tons per year. Apple sells around 200 million iPhones per year. Assuming 200 g for a phone, that's 40000 metric tons.

Edit: I was off by a factor of 10, corrected. The overall smartphone market is likely approximately 10x of Bitcoin, assuming this study is correct, 200g per device, 1.5 billion devices per year (from https://www.statista.com/statistics/263441/global-smartphone...)

Also, 1.5 billion smartphones per year is incredible. Unless there are many people who break/upgrade their phone several times per year, that means a much bigger fraction of humanity now has access to a computing device and likely also to the world's knowledge than I thought.

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#149

Post by [deleted] »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #19

Completely pales next to something as egregious as disposable tech that sells in the millions and only has a lifespan of 2 years tops like AirPods. They will still be washing up on beaches 100 years after every single person involved in their design has passed. Whole electronics industry needs to take this stuff more seriously, we need more replaceable batteries and storage, right to repair on a global level and laws…

[deleted]

Re: Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem

#150

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

hbag wrote: post #122
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please get some perspective. Read more actual facts and data from various different angles, you've obviously dived deep into one side with little consideration for any other. You give me the kind opportunity to quote a favourite lyric of mine: The do-er and the thinker: no allowance for the other Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull[0] [0]: http://www.collecting-tull.com/Albums/Lyrics/ThickAsABrick.h...

nothing screams 'efficiency' like everyone participating in the network having to write to an append-only ledger every time any transaction whatsoever happens im sure thats FAR more efficient than banks, right? i hate banks as much as the next guy but good fucking lord is bitcoin terrible

The append-only ledger is surprisingly efficient, to the point where you can process the entire thing on a decent laptop in a couple days.

And judging the costs bank are able to charge for international wires, even when comparing them to the horrendous fees for Bitcoin (Core, BTC) on-chain transactions, I'm not convinced Bitcoin is that much less efficient.

Post reply on HN