Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021 • Hacker News Board

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#241

Post by tor12 » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:53 PM UTC

hocuspocus wrote: post #121

unicornmama wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to share your evidence for the first paragraph?

There's none. It's mind boggling that 12 years later, people like the parent poster are still claiming bullshit like that when there's literally zero evidence, rather the opposite. No country with underdeveloped banking and payment systems is interested in something like Bitcoin. They need something cheap and efficient, federated and... centralized! Many African countries are perfectly fine using M-Pesa.

> literally zero evidence

to think like this is mind boggling, try to relax, do some research (no, not reading news or opinion articles), and you will find your evidence

also: if smarter people than you are mostly pro-something, perhaps there is something else to it, stop thinking like a 5 year old trying to save the world from some made up monster no one else can see

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#242

Post by hocuspocus » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:54 PM UTC

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #218

hocuspocus wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Political problems don't have technological solutions. Telling these people to use Bitcoin is just giving their government another tool to send them to jail.

Any arguments against bitcoin are shattered by one simple fact: currently bitcoin is the least risky and simultaneously the easiest way for russian citizens to fund anti-Putin opposition. Any first world do-gooder who wants to ban it because 'it is bad for environment' should first ban himself from existence because humans are bad for environment.

Seeing how well the ransomware industry is faring, it seems Putin doesn't feel too threatened yet.

But what happens when he bans all exchanges that off-board cryptocurrencies to Ruble? Will the opposition be happy with tokens that are suddenly useless for day-to-day expenses?

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#243

Post by arcticbull » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:54 PM UTC

cableshaft wrote: post #223

arcticbull wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You really think that China banning bitcoin means they no longer use those dirty coal power plants? No, but banning the miners meant they didn't have to build a whole pile more. "Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point" - they have the moral high-ground on this issue. > Right now China has only promised to reduce its fossil fuel to 20% of its total energy use by 2060. Sure. And it would hav…

> No, but banning the miners meant they didn't have to build a whole pile more. I wasn't arguing that it was a bad thing that China banned bitcoin mining, just that banning it didn't reduce fossil fuels at all (maybe slowed down how fast they expanded in the future, sure). And they're still planning to build 43 new ones[1] in addition to what they already have. So now what? Can't ban bitcoin mining in China twice. Ho…

> So now what? Can't ban bitcoin mining in China twice. How are we going to get them to reduce emissions now?

Indeed, they have a lot of work ahead of them. I will not disagree. I'm hopeful their huge push towards nuclear power will help them bridge the gap. They are one of the biggest sources of carbon emissions and all sorts of other pollution in the world.

> You are neither the worst person I know, nor did you make a great point, nor am I heartbroken. Thanks for the snarky reference to a Clickhole article[2] that's just a slight sidestep from an ad hominem attack.

I sincerely apologize, but that wasn't directed at you! The heartbreak was mine, and the "worst person you know" was directed at the PRC government. I was implying that while they do not have a particularly stellar track record in the ethics department, in this case, they made a good (TM) choice.

I suspect our positions are closer together than they are far apart.

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#244

Post by jallen_dot_dev » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:55 PM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #162

scottiebarnes wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Energy isn't scarce, its actually abundant. At this particular moment, clean renewable energy capacity is more scarce than fossil fuel, but there is simply far more potential energy in solar, wind, nuclear, etc. Remember, our planet is bombarded by solar rays 24/7 and will continue to receive this energy for billions of years. Human energy consumption has been exponential over time. We started by harvesting crops wit…

> Rather than scapegoat Bitcoin for our climate crisis, start by... I too enjoy whataboutism to distract folks from the environmental impact of my favorite Ponzi scheme. > Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment. If you invest in massive solar and wind plants then use that energy to roll rocks up and back down a hill forever like Sisyphus, that's jus…

> > Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment.

> If you invest in massive solar and wind plants then use that energy to roll rocks up and back down a hill forever like Sisyphus, that's just more waste.

Yeah this is what I don't get from the PoW-is-actually-a-good-thing camp. Presumably if Bitcoin were to incentivize the production of clean energy it would be by using it to mine bitcoin. And even if it makes it cheaper to produce due to economies of scale or whatever, that would just translate into increased mining profits. Bitcoin is an uncapped demand on energy that will soak up all energy production up to a certain price (based on the value of bitcoin) so I don't think it can possibly be net positive for energy production/use.

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#245

Post by it_citizen » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:55 PM UTC

xiphias2 wrote: post #195

it_citizen wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inflation might a problem but a world where countries would no longer be able to adjust the value of their money isn’t scarier? Wouldn’t we be giving up an essential lever to adjust to changing economical conditions?

The only thing that changes is that governments have to raise the taxes from people explicitly instead of a hidden inflation tax. I think it’s great for goverments as well, as it gives them more responsibility over how they are spending money. Norway of a great example of people paying high taxes because they see the government as responsibly spending and reinvesting its tax revenue. I never asked money from other pe…

How do you keep inflation within an economic zone between 2 and 3 percent without control over your money? No matter if the economic growth is between -1% and 10%?

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#246

Post by tor12 » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:57 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #164

xiphias2 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, if you are serious, the Bitcoin Standard book is a worthy read. But what’s important is that Bitcoin solves the inflation problem, and proof of work is the only system that we have for getting rid of the Cantillon effect of modern banking: the closer people get to the top of the central banks, the richer they get and destroy life for those who don’t have access to the inner layers of central banking. With Bitco…

Inflation isn't a bad thing necessarily.

> Inflation isn't a bad thing necessarily.

if you are already rich...

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#247

Post by oneoff786 » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:57 PM UTC

esarbe wrote: post #179

oneoff786 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you give food to poor areas for free then their farmers go out of business, the area becomes more poor, and they become dependent on aid. Breaking systems always has consequences. It’s not easy.

How about industrialized nations get rid of their agricultural subsidies?

Then the price of food goes up, and farmers have a bad time?

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#248

Post by alkonaut » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:57 PM UTC

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #225

alkonaut wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you want that? There isn’t a cheaper centralized system of rendering 3D graphics that uses 1/1000 the energy. We can handle transactions with quite little energy using traditional means. It’s not pseudonymous or decentralized and it’s not extremely efficient. But compared to Bitcoin it’s a wonder of efficiency. I wouldn’t take anything off the table when it comes to banning energy use. But rendering in part…

Ok, imagine yourself in Belarus. All traditional means are under government control. How do you fund anti-Lukashemko guerrillas? Cash?

Yes, for example. Or any other way that has worked more or less well throughout history. Few people are buying the “but the dissidents” argument of cryptocurrency. It’s a valid use case in theory but little so far shows that has been a use case.

The thing about Bitcoin is that it’s mature tech now. Whatever promises it has should be materialized now. If it’s to be a currency rather than a store of value and instrument of speculation - it ought to show already. But it doesn’t. It hasn’t materialized. And we shouldn’t be sinking resources into something that is perpetually a few years from being a currency.

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#249

Post by woodruffw » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:58 PM UTC

mwattsun wrote: post #203

woodruffw wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a battery -- that's a form of economic triage where you burn power to produce tokens that allow you to buy power somewhere else. To use the analogy: nowhere is the battery being "drained". Edit: to make the analogy more complete: a bitcoin is, in effect, proof that energy has been wasted. Using a bitcoin to purchase renewable power from a windfarm is tantamount purchasing that power with empty batteries or…

You are literally correct, but if I use excess energy in Iceland to create Bitcoin, which I electronically send to Chile to finance a hydroelectric power plant, thus making electricity available in Chile that previously wasn't, how is that not like charging up a battery in Iceland and sending it to Chile?

Because you've expended the energy twice: once in Iceland, and again in Chile. The "battery" analogy requires a transfer of power, not a transfer of proof that the power was spent.

Re: Bitcoin consumed 134 TWh in total during 2021

#250

Post by cableshaft » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 6:58 PM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #162

scottiebarnes wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Energy isn't scarce, its actually abundant. At this particular moment, clean renewable energy capacity is more scarce than fossil fuel, but there is simply far more potential energy in solar, wind, nuclear, etc. Remember, our planet is bombarded by solar rays 24/7 and will continue to receive this energy for billions of years. Human energy consumption has been exponential over time. We started by harvesting crops wit…

> Rather than scapegoat Bitcoin for our climate crisis, start by... I too enjoy whataboutism to distract folks from the environmental impact of my favorite Ponzi scheme. > Do those things, and Bitcoin will literally subsidize and accelerate clean energy infrastructure investment. If you invest in massive solar and wind plants then use that energy to roll rocks up and back down a hill forever like Sisyphus, that's jus…

> Bitcoin isn't incentivized to chase renewables. It's incentivized to find the cheapest power it can get its hands on anywhere on earth and then waste it.

And now renewable energy is the cheapest source of power as of 2020[1].

You do have a point on how there's still emissions generated in the building of wind and solar plants, though, but building wind and solar plants is still our best solution to our electrical emissions other than asking everyone around the world if they would kindly stop using electricity.

"Almost two-thirds of wind & solar projects built globally last year will be able to generate cheaper electricity than even the world’s cheapest new coal plants, according to a NEW report from IRENA"

[1]: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/renewables-cheapest-e...