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

How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 91 posts

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#51

Post by hartator »

polote wrote: post #43
dvt wrote: post #9

I'm genuinely curious when the fat lady will stop singing in regards to Bitcoin. I sort-of understand the allure of ETH and its derivatives ("programmable money" does bring something new to the table), but BTC is supposed to be a "value store" yet is down 30% from November; or it's supposed to be a "currency" but you can't use it as one; or it's supposed to be "decentralized" but mining is monopolized by a handful of…

What's the difference between BTC and a GOOG share ? Google doesn't give any dividend and the GOOG share has not any voting right. But even the GOOGL share there is a voting right, but Google founders will have the majority anyway. So what's the difference ? In both case you posses a piece of electronic paper that can be exchanged on a market and there is no other benefit. Not defending BTC, I'm just curious

A GOOG share has a claim on current company assets and potential future profits.

BTC has a claim of brute force sha256 2x key in the past.

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#52

Post by tejohnso »

dvt wrote: post #9

I'm genuinely curious when the fat lady will stop singing in regards to Bitcoin. I sort-of understand the allure of ETH and its derivatives ("programmable money" does bring something new to the table), but BTC is supposed to be a "value store" yet is down 30% from November; or it's supposed to be a "currency" but you can't use it as one; or it's supposed to be "decentralized" but mining is monopolized by a handful of…

Here is Every Reason Bitcoin Will Not Fail[1]. I believe some of what you mentioned is at least partially addressed.

[1]: https://safehodl.github.io/failure/

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#53

Post by scotty79 »

Aterio wrote: post #16
trhway wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BTC providing demand for renewables stimulates the development of renewables. Any massive investment like in renewables carries a risk, and the higher the demand the lesser the risk for the investment on the supply side.

No it doesn't. It's just a lie. BTC provides demand for cheap energy not for renewable. And it consumes the demand. It doesn't create this demand for others.

Cheapest energy is when renewables production peaks. Then it can be worth less than zero.

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#54

Post by thawaya3113 »

polote wrote: post #43
dvt wrote: post #9

I'm genuinely curious when the fat lady will stop singing in regards to Bitcoin. I sort-of understand the allure of ETH and its derivatives ("programmable money" does bring something new to the table), but BTC is supposed to be a "value store" yet is down 30% from November; or it's supposed to be a "currency" but you can't use it as one; or it's supposed to be "decentralized" but mining is monopolized by a handful of…

What's the difference between BTC and a GOOG share ? Google doesn't give any dividend and the GOOG share has not any voting right. But even the GOOGL share there is a voting right, but Google founders will have the majority anyway. So what's the difference ? In both case you posses a piece of electronic paper that can be exchanged on a market and there is no other benefit. Not defending BTC, I'm just curious

Michael Dell took DELL private. He was able to raise the money to buyout DELL and was able to gain control of their plants, bank balances, etc. He could change how Dell operated and now he can choose to keep the profits within the company, distribute it to owners, or take all of it as his salary.

(note, I’m using Michael Dell as a stand in for whatever the buyout consortium was).

You can’t do anything like that with BTC.

But here’s the thing. Dividends exist. Many public companies pay dividends. The fact that Google does not pay a dividend is simply reflective of the fact that a majority of its owners (which is what shareholders are) believe that any additional earnings are best invested back into Google. (That’s the principle…in practice there are also tax disadvantages to dividends that make them further unattractive).

If a majority of owners didn’t believe that, they can make Google pay dividends.

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#55

Post by skybrian »

polote wrote: post #43
dvt wrote: post #9

I'm genuinely curious when the fat lady will stop singing in regards to Bitcoin. I sort-of understand the allure of ETH and its derivatives ("programmable money" does bring something new to the table), but BTC is supposed to be a "value store" yet is down 30% from November; or it's supposed to be a "currency" but you can't use it as one; or it's supposed to be "decentralized" but mining is monopolized by a handful of…

What's the difference between BTC and a GOOG share ? Google doesn't give any dividend and the GOOG share has not any voting right. But even the GOOGL share there is a voting right, but Google founders will have the majority anyway. So what's the difference ? In both case you posses a piece of electronic paper that can be exchanged on a market and there is no other benefit. Not defending BTC, I'm just curious

Google often buys back stock, so that's money going to investors that comes out of Google's revenues. That's positive-sum for investors. (The amount of money so far isn't nearly enough to justify their market cap, but presumably more will come over the years.)

For Bitcoin, by design, the only possible source of revenue is other investors buying in later. This is zero sum in the long run for investors, and negative sum for anyone currently holding or buying in (since some people have sold). But it's an infinite game so the long run might never come, and you can do well if you don't hold too long.

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#57

Post by captn3m0 »

ur-whale wrote: post #42
dvt wrote: post #9

I'm genuinely curious when the fat lady will stop singing in regards to Bitcoin. I sort-of understand the allure of ETH and its derivatives ("programmable money" does bring something new to the table), but BTC is supposed to be a "value store" yet is down 30% from November; or it's supposed to be a "currency" but you can't use it as one; or it's supposed to be "decentralized" but mining is monopolized by a handful of…

>Maybe I'm just not smart enough to understand BTC. There is one aspect of BTC that IMO does not receive enough attention. Can you think of any other asset that: 1) strictly no one knows you own, yet you do own it absolutely, short of losing your mind or dying. 2) can't be seized by anyone, especially if 1) holds true 3) is highly likely (because of - among other things - finite, known-ahead-of-time supply) to preser…

The majority of retail investors in BTC are not buying it for the above properties - they are buying it on exchanges that report to the taxman as a speculative asset. For these users, both 1 and 2 are not Satisfied (the bank knows you invest in crypto, and the exchange holds your crypto, you don’t have control over it). (3) is getting harder to claim every day but time will tell.

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#58

Post by asciimov »

beezle wrote: post #45
asciimov wrote: post #32

The reason EROCT, the Texas Republicans (TRP) and the minesr are doing this is to raise prices on electrical power. During the right time of year, the cost of power can often go negative overnight. Ercot wants to get rid of this and ultimately raise the price of power as negative power prices have consequences for all the middle men involved. In Texas there are lots of middle men, negative power means they might owe…

I've clearly missed something but what is attraction of miners that a municipality would offer any tax breaks at all? (assuming those are property type taxes as there would be no sales tax) As you point out, at the high end it may be 100 jobs, I suspect probably far less are needed to mind the data/mining center?

In my hometown, it's in part so they can say they have it and part kowtowing to state Republican leadership.

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#59

Post by vmception »

reaperducer wrote: post #34
vmception wrote: post #15

My prediction is that the only ones of these that will survive are the natural gas ones that also sell to the grid. Texas has so much gas and methane being thrown into the atmosphere for decades. The regulator rubber stamps pollution exceptions to allow sites to continue doing it. Crypto miners can and are cleaning that up, since they have a simple usage converting that gas to energy with a simple catalytic converter…

From what I've read in newspapers over the last year or so, now that satellites allow methane and other discharges to be detected and investigated by entities outside of Texas (both American and international), the biggest polluters are getting out of the game. Up to now, whenever there's been a big discharge, the suspected polluter would say, "Well, it was next to our pipeline, and it's the sort of stuff we have in…

Yes, I could see that. The regulator especially but also all levels of government there are captured by their affinity towards energy production or the industry itself. But they also want to meet their climate goals and it becomes increasingly embarrassing and indefensible. So they just need the profitable option, crypto miners are it.

Re: How Texas is becoming a Bitcoin mining hub

#60

Post by dvt »

dcolkitt wrote: post #49
dvt wrote: post #9

I'm genuinely curious when the fat lady will stop singing in regards to Bitcoin. I sort-of understand the allure of ETH and its derivatives ("programmable money" does bring something new to the table), but BTC is supposed to be a "value store" yet is down 30% from November; or it's supposed to be a "currency" but you can't use it as one; or it's supposed to be "decentralized" but mining is monopolized by a handful of…

> BTC is supposed to be a "value store" yet is down 30% from November It certainly would be hard to argue against the fact that gold and silver are stores of value. (Even if you don't invest in them, it's pretty clear that the vast majority of market demand for precious metals comes from store of value.) Yet silver is currently 55% off its peak, just a few years ago gold was 40% off its peak. Store of value doesn't i…

> It certainly would be hard to argue against the fact that gold and silver are stores of value.

I don't think gold and silver are stores of value, but (certain) Rolexes and Ferraris are. And so is real estate.

> The dollar is a currency, but the majority of dollar owners live in foreign countries where you can't pay for things in dollars.

Not sure if you've done much traveling, but the USD is basically usable everywhere.

> Bank of America can freeze my account.

I think this is a solution looking for a problem. It's extremely rare that a bank will freeze an account for non-legitimate reasons. But I mean, sure, you're technically correct: there's a non-zero probability BofA will freeze your account.

Post reply on HN