Live data from Hacker News

Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

marketwatch.com

241–247 of 247 posts

Re: Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without riders and earmarks there's no way to get someone to support your bill if they don't like the concept to start with. There's no downside for not supporting a bill, so cutting half of its provisions will still half to vote against. Riders and earmarks allow politicians to secure minor wins that they can sell to their electorate as the reason for supporting a bill. And most of these things would simply never pa…

> Without riders and earmarks there's no way to get someone to support your bill if they don't like the concept to start with. Why is this a problem? I see it as easier to call out politicians in public. Prevent the problems that are essentially: "Despite the 'Puppy and Sunshine' bill actually providing everyone with puppies and sunshine, we can't support it because it also summons the literal anti-christ to destroy…

> "Despite the 'Puppy and Sunshine' bill actually providing everyone with puppies and sunshine, we can't support it because it also summons the literal anti-christ to destroy the Earth. The puppies and sunshine is simply a trick to summon the anti-christ."

Was this edgy strawman really useful?

> IMO doing so makes the bill far more transparent _to the public_.

How? The public that are engaged are still almost entirely getting their knowledge through the media, and they won't cover small bills due to lack of journalists, and more importantly, because readers aren't interested in them. I'm not sure who this mythical cohort who want to understand more about e.g. legislation that involves federal spending in Ohio, but can only do so by looking at every single small bill until they find "The Providing Ohio Reinvestment Kickback Bill" on page 23.

> I do not understand why such a thing could not happen without these nor with packages (as defined above).

Because there is only so much time available to get bills passed if nothing else, a bill focussing solely on niche and/or local issues are going to get bumped down the queue at every stage - in committee, getting scored for budgetary implications, getting floor time etc. - and there are two houses to make it worse.

> Do you not see that as a problem?

Well that depends on what it actually was of course.

The US system of government is at every level designed to prevent getting anything done, and so lots of things get lumped onto big bills that are likely to pass. I mean there's even a literal "omnibus bill" FFS. But the alternative is that "$1,000,000 for additional spaces at homeless shelters for transgender youth" isn't ever going to get to the floor, let alone pass in the House and get 60 votes in the Senate.

Re: Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So why are ransomware hackers never prosecuted? Because they're typically based in Russia, and Russia has a policy that it will not prosecute its citizens for computer crimes unless they perpetrated them against Russians or Russian organizations. My understanding is most ransomware has code to detect Russian computers (e.g. by checking localization settings), and will refuse to run if it finds itself on one for tha…

Why not set all US system to have russian locale?

That is actually done by some orgs for security purposes.

Re: Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thermal efficiency is an absolute - units of energy expended vs work achieved. There is an alternative: proof of stake. Or removing certain constraints on the problem space. A different approach to solving the problem is absolutely an alternative. Visa is an alternative. The extant banking system is an alternative.

You can't say how efficient it is without calculating how layer 2 scaling affects per transaction energy usage. You can do millions of layer 2 transactions that eventually settle as 1 transaction on the main chain.

You can do “layer 2” transactions that settle on ACH or wire transfers, like Venmo or square cash, what’s your point? This is just more shameful greenwashing to pump up bag.

You would have to do literally millions per on chain transaction using bitcoin to match ACH, visa or a proof of stake chain.

This is of course after you consider opening a single LN channel for every human on earth would take 75 years and 300 billion dollars if the chain did nothing else. Like putting in a request for a Soviet phone line. LN has quadratic routing efficiency and is boat anchored to garbage.

Re: Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't say how efficient it is without calculating how layer 2 scaling affects per transaction energy usage. You can do millions of layer 2 transactions that eventually settle as 1 transaction on the main chain.

You can do “layer 2” transactions that settle on ACH or wire transfers, like Venmo or square cash, what’s your point? This is just more shameful greenwashing to pump up bag. You would have to do literally millions per on chain transaction using bitcoin to match ACH, visa or a proof of stake chain. This is of course after you consider opening a single LN channel for every human on earth would take 75 years and 300 bil…

Difference is L2 BTC transactions are uncensorable, instant, and the BTC itself cannot be confiscated.

>This is of course after you consider opening a single LN channel for every human on earth would take 75 years and 300 billion dollars if the chain did nothing else.

This is completely wrong. Custodial wallets exist, side chains (liquid network) exist and if you need more security, wallets like Phoenix exist that allow instant dedicated channel opening for 3000 SATs (~$1.50, which is less than the 3% fee for a single $100 Visa/Mastercard tx).

Don't forget, when the Bitcoin price 100Xs again, throughput of existing lightning channels will 100x as well (LN node with $50M of channel capacity will automatically turn into a $5B node with 0 intervention).

You wrongly believe scaling is a lot more complicated than it actually is.

Re: Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

#245
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess we need a proper CO2 tax to encourage better technology than proof of work

ETH PoS mainnet transition is underway and will be completed early 2022. With this holders of ETH will be able to earn fees from transactions, just by running an application on their standard normal computer. The only encouragement you need to move off of POW is profit motive.

So do you think Eth miners will just write off their expensive GPUs and throw them into trash bin? It is rather obvious that they will switch to either fork (less probable) or to next best token (more probable).

Re: Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most coiners conveniently ignore block reward when calculating the cost of a transaction - that's your missing factor. Consider that the only reason you need to secure the blockchain is because it is mutable, if it were immutable it would be sufficient to simply publish it with a known hash. Ergo, 100% of the energy consumption of the Bitcoin network is attributable to transaction processing and therefore can be quan…

You can do 1+ million lightning network transactions that will settle as 1 transaction on the BTC blockchain, so ~$93/1,000,000? Sounds amazingly cheap for uncensorable transactions. ESG people are trying to solve something that is already solved. POW is here to stay and will scale tremendously well as we all move to layer 2.

As I mentioned upthread I can't possibly disagree more. PoW is designed specifically not to scale. The higher the price the more it wastes. It's an embarrassingly poor technology.

You completely synthesized $93/1000000 obviously, and as we discussed it would take 75 years to open a channel for everyone alive today and $300,000,000,000.

Re: Senators move to exempt Bitcoin, crypto miners from proposed U.S. tax rules

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do 1+ million lightning network transactions that will settle as 1 transaction on the BTC blockchain, so ~$93/1,000,000? Sounds amazingly cheap for uncensorable transactions. ESG people are trying to solve something that is already solved. POW is here to stay and will scale tremendously well as we all move to layer 2.

As I mentioned upthread I can't possibly disagree more. PoW is designed specifically not to scale. The higher the price the more it wastes. It's an embarrassingly poor technology. You completely synthesized $93/1000000 obviously, and as we discussed it would take 75 years to open a channel for everyone alive today and $300,000,000,000.

This is a poor take, I addressed the false $300B channel claim elsewhere in the thread but was downvoted so my response is invisible.

The HN echo chamber must stay intact at all costs I guess.

Post reply on HN