Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated • Hacker News Board

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#211

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 8:58 PM UTC

nprz wrote: post #151

joe_the_user wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of wasteful industries - crypto is a small slice The difference between crypto and things like agriculture or transportation is obvious. People need food and transportation. If crypto was eliminated entirely tomorrow, on average, no one would suffer - some would lose relative wealth but others would gain relative wealth. Unlike conventional financial markets even, it's hard to argue crypto provides an…

What about commercial cruise lines? Do people need to go on cruises? The cruise industry uses over double the emissions of the bitcoin protocol[0]. Furthermore, millions would be affected if bitcoin were to go offline tomorrow. Particularly people living in authoritarian states[1], or people who do not have access to traditional banking services. [0] https://twitter.com/gladstein/status/1414065840157347840?s=2... [1]…

But cryptocurrencies don't appear to need proof of work.

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#212

Post by md2020 » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 8:59 PM UTC

imtringued wrote: post #170

Trias11 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> our current system isn't here by accident And dinasaurs weren't on earth by accident. They were part of evolution and then replaced with other species more appropriate for evolving earth and conditions.

Bitcoin is just the gold standard but worse. With gold you can at least dig up more of it as your economy grows. Bitcoin doesn't care about the real economy.

What? There’s a finite supply of gold just like there’s a finite supply of Bitcoin. You can mine more Bitcoin just like you can dig up more gold, up until there’s no more to be mined.

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#213

Post by imtringued » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 8:59 PM UTC

dogman144 wrote: post #69

endisneigh wrote: post #3

There's some good data here - that being said, even if the carbon footprint were literally zero, I couldn't personally support cryptocurrency. Fundamentally it's the antithesis to democracy. Say whatever you will about all forms of government, but ultimately no matter the form, there's some level of accountability. Some governments use elections to facilitate this, others use the threat of rulers being killed. One wa…

The creation of a new gilded class is definitely a valid side effect in the event cryptocurrencies really do extend into a mainstream form of transaction/economic activity. what's doubly interesting is that group, especially as the early adopters are the ones with massive holdings, tend to have fairly intensely libertarian views. a potent combo of "i put my money where my mouth is" and "i was right" and "none of you…

The poorest benefit the most from inflation since they get fired first during bad economic conditions. The only exception is housing costs because rent doesn't really flow to low income households.

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#214

Post by dogman144 » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 9:00 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #137

reedjosh wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Inflation generally hurts the middle-class the most. The middle class typically has a mortgage and student loan debt for which inflation benefits them. The closer you are to the spiket, the more debt based inflation benefits you. The poor do lose the most.

You're not wrong, the the middle class has far more savings than the poorest quartile. Is it this you disagree with?

in short, you're focusing on savings while ignoring purchasing power

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#215

Post by keymone » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 9:00 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #3

There's some good data here - that being said, even if the carbon footprint were literally zero, I couldn't personally support cryptocurrency. Fundamentally it's the antithesis to democracy. Say whatever you will about all forms of government, but ultimately no matter the form, there's some level of accountability. Some governments use elections to facilitate this, others use the threat of rulers being killed. One wa…

Lol look at this dude thinking oligarchs didn’t exist before cryptocurrencies.

It’s not any form of store of wealth that perpetuates the oligarchies, it’s unwillingness and corruptibility of political class that allows them to exist.

Half of fucking london is owned by oligarchs as an investment haven, so until you publicly come out in support of demolishing that atrocity, don’t even utter a sound against cryptocurrencies, that just makes you a laughable hypocrite.

Not to mention that store of wealth is completely orthogonal to political systems and free access to store of wealth and transaction system that isn’t fuckedup-able by “government” should be basic human right.

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#216

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 9:01 PM UTC

dorkwood wrote: post #158

Syonyk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Early next year when Ethereum becomes PoS... Haven't they been planning to move to PoS "soon" now for at least several years? I hate to say I'll believe it when I see it, but... the believeability of their PoS timelines is more than a little suspect now.

You're getting downvoted, but you're not wrong. Here's a comment thread from 2016 with people making the same "early next year" claim. > Ethereum hopes to do away with mining by early 2017... They're switching to proof of stake. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12128406

[deleted]

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#217

Post by mandmandam » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 9:01 PM UTC

PpEY4fu85hkQpn wrote: post #201

xrd wrote: post #2

I still think war and oil are dirtier and don't see a way to wean ourselves off that consumption and impact. I do see that cryptocurrencies are moving toward energy reduction through things like proof of stake and L2s. https://susanfsu.medium.com/think-btc-is-a-dirty-business-co...

PoS has been right around the corner for about 8 years. It's bait.

Huh? Nano is here right now; has been for years. It's near instant, feeless, and uses less energy than a credit card transaction; all using delegated POS tending toward decentralisation.

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#218

Post by mlinksva » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 9:03 PM UTC

cwkoss wrote: post #19

The idea of taxing cryptocurrencies specifically for carbon emissions is some mixture of naive, shallow and sour grapes. There are a lot of wasteful industries - crypto is a small slice of the overall pie and is arguably the most responsive to market forces. Make universally applied carbon taxes across all industries and let the market sort it out. I'm a crypto bull, and fully support greening our energy economy. Adv…

Has "The idea of taxing cryptocurrencies specifically for carbon emissions" been proposed? I don't see it mentioned in the article discussed here. I wish the article had proposed that idea, it'd be more complete if it had -- it doesn't propose anything as far as I can tell.

I agree that a general carbon tax would be better, and as a bonus, there's various progress toward just that around the world. But I'd find the argument you're making more compelling as a rebut to focus on cryptocurrency carbon footprint if the players in the cyrptocurrency industry were forcefully lobbying for general carbon taxes. Are there any examples of that?

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#219

Post by ARandumGuy » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 9:03 PM UTC

chroem- wrote: post #200

ARandumGuy wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cryptocurrencies advertise themselves as democratic, but in reality they're only as democratic as a corporate shareholder vote. Only those with shares can vote, and more shares = more votes. You may view state control on economic activity as authoritarian, but that's a pretty extreme view. I personally think that a democratically elected government should be able to control the economy when necessary, even if I don't…

> You may view state control on economic activity as authoritarian, but that's a pretty extreme view. Is it really? Throughout history it seems to go hand-in-hand with massive human rights abuses. Case studies include the USSR, DPRK, China, Cambodia, Cuba, etc.

"State control on economic activity" is extremely broad, and can encompass everything from a USSR style planned economy, to the US government breaking up Standard Oil, to even food safety regulations. Given the context of the post, and the general user makeup of HN, I assumed you were discussing economic control based on places like the US or EU. I'm not entirely sure how North Korea or Cambodia fit into the previous arguments.

Re: Cryptocurrencies’ Carbon Footprint Underestimated

#220

Post by imtringued » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 9:03 PM UTC

nonameiguess wrote: post #91

dogman144 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The creation of a new gilded class is definitely a valid side effect in the event cryptocurrencies really do extend into a mainstream form of transaction/economic activity. what's doubly interesting is that group, especially as the early adopters are the ones with massive holdings, tend to have fairly intensely libertarian views. a potent combo of "i put my money where my mouth is" and "i was right" and "none of you…

Everything hits the poor the hardest, but I doubt there really is this hypothetical group of people with large cash savings they intend to hold for decades while keeping it in cash. At least in the US. I think that might be a thing in Japan, but not among the poor. The poor are generally debtors, who are helped by inflation because it reduces the real value of what they owe, whereas the goods they purchased on credit…

You know, it's not even intentional inflation. What the Fed is doing isn't creating inflation, it's moderating inflation downwards. Inflation simply happens through regular economic activities even if the government isn't involved. People borrow and spend their savings faster and faster, that's inflation. What the Fed is doing is like a PID control loop that hits the brakes when the economy is overheating. It needs 2% inflation as a buffer to achieve negative real interest rates. If arbitrary negative real interest rates were possible then the Fed could do price level targeting instead of inflation rate targeting and even in the latter the desired inflation rate could simply be 0% but any inflation shocks are permanent.