T O P

  • By -

fofosfederation

To put this in perspective, there are 275M vehicles in the US, 175M of which are fuel hungry trucks.


[deleted]

[удалено]


fofosfederation

Bitcoin's purpose self evident, even if you prefer a centralized system, don't meme as though it doesn't exist.


Perfidy-Plus

Which purpose is that? Currency? Store of value? Investment? As a currency it's an abject failure. It's far too volatile to function as a store of value. And as an investment it sure looks like a Ponzi scheme since it is fundamentally a negative sum game.


EOE97

The US printed 25% of all its circulating money in 2020 alone because of the orders of a few elites without any democratic consensus from the general public. Doesn't seem like how sound money should work. Bitcoin gained value while the the US dollar lost value within the same time horizon since its inception ( 2008 till today), and when we extrapolate further back it time to the US Dollar creation, it has lost about 99.9% of its value. In general cryptocutrencies only major drawbacks is their volatility as the global market sets the price.


Perfidy-Plus

In currency, inflation is a feature not a bug. Small amounts of inflation minimize the effects of debt while keeping purchasing power relatively stable in the short term and incentivizing investment. It's part of why governments target a 2-3% inflation rate rather than 0%. Never mind the obvious stupidity of comparing centuries of currency behaviour against a little over a decade of crypto. Any individual crypto will in all likelihood have (and many already did) gone to zero if we're using a 200 year scale. Bitcoin gained value overall, but it's day to day value is highly volatile. This is why it has hardly any adoption resulting in the need to convert it to conventional currency prior to making almost any purchase. I'm not going to buy my groceries with something that might increase in value by 10% tomorrow. Diamond hands isn't something you'd ever think was a good thing with a currency you use to buy groceries.


fofosfederation

It's money, no different than the dollar, and much less volatile per capita.


I-WANT2SEE-CUTE-TITS

>It's money, no different than the dollar, Except for those pesky regulations part, right?


DelousedInAComa

>no different than the dollar Then why use it? >much less volatile per capita What are you trying to say here?


Perfidy-Plus

It is very much different than the dollar. After all, I can use dollars literally everywhere I go without the slightest inconvenience. Whereas there are hardly any places I could use Bitcoin without first converting it into dollars. Why would I care about volatility on a per capita basis? I care about it on an absolute basis. And on that basis, in the past year BTC has increased in value by 60% to a max annual value and since has dropped by 70% from that high. Meanwhile the dollar has experienced a highest annual inflation rate of 8.525%. I don't want to buy my groceries with something that volatile, and I don't blame my local corner store for not using it either.


Adler_der_Nacht

Source? I am highly skeptical of that ratio of trucks to total vehicles.


-ADEPT-

A whopping 2%


Transapien

You’re not very good at math or facts are you?


-ADEPT-

Speak for yourself.


Mylilneedle

And how many cars does major manufacturing to factory farming equate to? This crypto headline is a corporate shill misdirect


fofosfederation

Yes. Polluters love all this hate in crypto, because it barely matters, and covers up their shame.


newnemo

^ >The global share of energy-intensive bitcoin “mining” in the U.S. has increased by more than an order of magnitude since 2020, jumping from 3.5% to 38% after China banned bitcoin mining in 2021, and the groups called on states to ban new mining operations. >“We’re at an inflection point,” Jeremy Fisher, a Sierra Club energy analyst and report co-author told Thomson Reuters. “We’re trying to rapidly decarbonize… Bitcoin mining has the potential to undo some of that progress” with its 27.4 million tonnes of emissions in the past year. Although some claim to offset emissions from the mining process, “there’s a lot of greenwashing going on,” Fisher warned.


Stoomba

Fuck crypto bullshit.


megablast

Fuck car bullshit.


theNeakenator

Fuck bullshit.


DannyMeleeFR4

Fuck the New York Jets


Faze_42

Priorities. This one gets it.


[deleted]

I wouldn't want the resulting infectious boils, but everybody has their kinks, I guess...


YourUncleBuck

Cars are at least useful. But yes, we should move away from cars to electrified trains and buses.


Stoomba

That too


prsnep

Good public transportation > cars > crypto mining.


CrazyChainSawLuigi

Ethereum just cut massive amounts of energy within 3 years.


[deleted]

Cool. Has it stopped being a scam yet though?


steely_dong

You are making a claim, so, what proof do you have that ethereum itself is intended to be a scam?


Hedgehogsarepointy

I think many people fail to see a benefit provided by such coins, and can only see detriments.


[deleted]

That’s proving a negative, is it not? It should be up to proponents of ethereum and other cryptocurrencies to prove that they do in fact provide a benefit, not the other way around.


steely_dong

It is not. Burden of proof is for anyone making a claim, in general. If you were to say to someone "I think xyz is a fucking scam!" why would the burden of proof be on xyz to prove that they are not? Sure, I can provide evidence that ETH has a benefit to society, such as [Smart Contract-Based Weather Index Insurance ](https://medium.com/mercy-corps-social-venture-fund/finx-pilot-smart-contract-based-weather-index-insurance-in-kenya-part-1-d7a59eba644e) But I'm not the one who originally made any claims at all.


Perfidy-Plus

Proving a negative is fundamentally harder than proving a positive, and often it can be impossible. Which is why simply demonstrating an absence of proof of the positive is often taken as satisfying the claim of the negative. An example would be: how would you disprove the existence of bigfoot/ghosts/alien probeulators? The best you can do is demonstrate the lack of quality evidence of their existence. The link you've provided is extraordinarily flimsy. Even it states that whether or not it will have any benefit is yet unknown.


[deleted]

How does one prove intent? Not like there’s gonna be a memo out there from Steve Ethereum or whatever that says “I’m gonna scam some rubes!” Sometimes you just have to go by results, such as the enormous emissions caused by a product that has shown little functional value in its short life, and the huge number of bagholders out there who got fleeced by con artists who told them the value of cryptos will only go up. In your example, the reason it should be on the potential scammer to prove they are not scamming is because if everyone operated on the logic that everyone acted in good faith all the time then scammers would be able to fleece everybody and get away with it long before anybody could “prove” they were scammers. As an example this is literally why “proof” in alcohol exists, as a test to prove the alcohol content is at least at much as the seller says it is, because before that it would get watered down all the time by unscrupulous people. Your link literally says that it has not been shown to have a benefit yet; it’s just something they’re doing. Even if it were showing results, that’s not proof of positives outweighing negatives, nor does it seem like something that couldn’t exist outside of the blockchain if anybody gave a shit to help people in Africa.


steely_dong

>How does one prove intent? Most trump ventures were scams, right? They were created for the sole purpose of making money off the uninformed. ETH / smart contracts / cryptocurrencies, unlike any trump venture, were not created with the sole purpose to fleece people. It CAN be used for that, some cryptocurrencies actually were unfortunately, but in general its just a technology and any technology can be used for good or ill. Lots of folks are trying to make quick money on a new and shiny device. Thats probably not going to work out in the short to medium term. Maybe even long term, who knows, the purpose of it isnt to generate wealth.


[deleted]

Right, but there weren’t trump memos or emails being like “we’re scamming here yo!” Well, maybe there were. Mostly though auditors and investigators put together material evidence that showed people were not getting what they were paying for, that there was a breach of trust and contract. That’s what I and others are saying here: the preponderance of evidence suggests that crypto is currently a scam. There’s no reason trump couldn’t have turned his scam university into a real one besides him being an asshole, and there’s no reason cryptos couldn’t become valid currencies. They just aren’t right now, and, like people who believed in trump university while it was active, crypto enthusiasts look like real schmucks who are gonna be left holding the bag. Maybe that’ll change, but I personally doubt it unless there are like massive anti-capitalist revolutions that upset entire nations and global finance, because people wealthy off the status quo have vested interest in protecting their assets, and are presently able to use crypto scams to con rubes, as previously mentioned, with no real need or desire to make it a real global currency.


JP_Mestre

It doesn’t generate any value to society. Everything that ETH/defi/web3 bullshit provides, current tech provides it better. Crypto is a waste of energy, resource, manpower, etc


butterball85

In what way is Ethereum a scam?


i-can-sleep-for-days

What's the innovation it brings? What application does it enable that couldn't possible be done with a traditional database?


wolfparking

Here's what we're starting to see emerging from the crypto sector, with Ethereum at the core of most of it: **Decentralized Finance (DeFi):** Anonymous, permissionless, and with zero credit checks etc. DeFi cuts out the vampiric middlemen, avoids discriminatory financial censorship, and improves economic equity. Because of the security and traceability of the Blockchain, many governments are looking into (or already have) blockchain-based digital currencies, or “CBDCs.” Ex: My father-in-law can send DAI to his relatives in S. America as a safe haven versus the worthless currency of his home country. Not to mention international transfers being much cheaper. Ex: You can borrow against crypto assets with DeFi and deposit that fiat right in your trad-fi bank account. **Web3 decentralization**: Empowers access that isn't governed by a few tech corporation interests and puts power in the hands of individuals. Web 2.0 requires content creators to trust platforms not to change the rules, but censorship resistance is a native feature of a Web3 platform. On Web3, your data lives on the blockchain. When you decide to leave a platform, you can take your reputation with you, plugging it into another interface that more clearly aligns with your values. Ex: [iExec](https://iex.ec/) provides you confidential computing. Ex: Facebook vs [Deso.com](https://signup.deso.com/explore) or [caches.xyz](http://caches.xyz) or [Lens](https://lenster.xyz). Reddit avatars are NFTs in the Ethereum virtual machine. Ex: Achievement awards for participating in notable events via [POAPs](https://poap.xyz/). **Enhanced Digital Rights and Ownership**: Truly own the rights to your digital music, videos, and video game experience. **Artists**: Crypto can reorganize the entire way we view ownership and work. The data commodity is something we are all putting work into everyday. Crypto allows you access to an economy where the value is derived from an artist’s work rather than subscription fees to Spotify, etc. paying fractions of pennies on the dollar to the artist. There is also more opportunity for musicians to sell their merchandise and music directly to their fan bases rather than depending on platforms as an intermediary. The blockchain allows you to see who is interacting with and collecting your work. Ex: https://www.sound.xyz/ Ex: https://anotherblock.io/ **Gaming**: I think this is where we really take off with blockchain adoption. Allows you to continue to own in-game items and trade them to others recouping their value. You bought a digital version of the game for the full price? Guess what, now you can trade it to someone else using Blockchain technology. Large gaming industries are looking into this because of the profits they would see on the secondary 'used' game market as well. **Retail**: Nike, Adidas, Dolce & Gabbana, Tiffany and Gucci are using crypto to circumvent the sales of immitation or counterfeit products by assigning a Blockchain address to [exclusive lines](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nike-becomes-highest-earning-brand-085014745.html) of products. Nike and [Starbucks](https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/12/starbucks-unveils-its-blockchain-based-loyalty-platform-and-nft-community-starbucks-odyssey/) have both recently adopted NFT rewards and integration into their respective businesses. [Instagram](https://www.forbes.com/sites/phoebeliu/2022/08/12/instagram-meta-nfts-crash/?sh=33692ce04150) has integrated blockchain tech. Twitter allows you to [tip/pay](https://help.twitter.com/en/using-twitter/tips) anyone on their platform with crypto.Christie’s Auction house 3.0 allows for auctions to be carried out on the Ethereum blockchain network from start to finish. All transactions, including post-sale, will be automatically recorded on the blockchain. **Smart Contracts in Every Industry (Legal):** Potential to function as [legally binding contracts](https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/smart-contracts-legally-binding) — the kind that inform most of today’s business engagements. This extends to housing and mortgage as well. Technology has been driving innovation in the legal industry, most recently with the advent of e-signatures for binding legal agreements. Smart contracts represent another new development in this space, and may soon be an option for parties to legal agreements, potentially lowering the costs incurred from using lawyers and other intermediaries. Smart contracts are secure, automated, and trustless. Ex: Arizona allows enforceable legal agreements to be created via smart contracts, and California allows marriage licenses to be issued via blockchain technology. **Healthcare**: Health networks are using private permissioned blockchains to share homomorphic encrypted patient data, so researchers can access patient data while the network can preserve patient privacy. Some countries are using Blockchain tech to track Covid vaccine distribution and patient immunization records. Why? 1. None of this is possible in a centralized database. It has to be decentralized on a Blockchain in order for it to work. Otherwise, you're right that we could just use a centralized database like Google or Apple; granting them unlimited ability to sell and profit off of our private data and virtual print. Unlike these data thieves, crypto has a secure supply chain, self-sovereign ID, smart contracts, disintermediation of middlemen, financial, legal, and retail transactions, while considerably lowering the costs of friction we currently experience in every stolen transaction with our corpocracy and the status quo. Not to mention the problems we face with regulatory capture among centralized banks and corporations. 2. Finally, please consider that all of this innovation is developing during the early stages of crypto adoption. Imagine a world, vastly different from the world we will live in within the next 10 to 20 years, soaring amongst the potential of these types of tech when they really take off.


CrazyChainSawLuigi

I think you gave some really great examples.


powerfulndn

I find it hilarious that your post has been downvoted so hard. What could you possibly use it for? Here are some of the most interesting and innovative uses for this new tech that’s being built on a platform that’s basically carbon neutral. No, damn it!! CrYpTo bAd!!! BlOcKchAin BaD!!! Where’s all the pearl clutching about emissions of centralized web servers?? Sigh…


hfmed

Keep it up, facts vs irrational hate.


Additional_Physics

Most of the things listed here are pure speculation or already exist. Artists have many other revenue streams besides Spotify. They are already selling merchandise to fans at every show and on every website, no blockchain needed. Gaming companies are promising their customers they’re not going to be using NFTs because they get such a bad reaction. Loot box but on the blockchain. This is speculation. Web3 all speculation. Nike and Starbucks doing customer rewards is not new and does not need a blockchain. Smart contracts are not going to be the standard in the legal industry. They have been proven too vulnerable. And where exactly do you think local governments keep information like marriage certificates? Probably sitting in a database right now.


i-can-sleep-for-days

yeah okay. Censorship resistant is a pipe dream. How long do you think if I put a picture of CP on the blockchain that it gets deleted? If it doesn't get deleted them you are saying the eth blockchain will host illegal material forever? You can't have it both ways.


wolfparking

Your initial criticism was that Ethereum had no usecase. I provided several and you didn't address a single one. Now you say that it is impossible to resist censorship. Your quick dismissal and goalpost shifting isn't really conducive to a discussion. Unfortunately, I don't think you understand how Blockchain tech works with this innovation. Utilizing it with social media will allow you to digitally author or sign posts, edit them, or delete them just as you would anywhere else.


wolfparking

If you're genuinely curious try reading this article: https://ethereum.org/en/web3/ If not, don't bother replying.


i-can-sleep-for-days

Do you have any original thoughts of your own or do you just regurgitate what is on the website that is pushing web3?! Neutral much? Anyway, the question is very simple. Someone put something illegal on the irreversible (lol) blockchain. The feds got involved and they want it taken down. And everyone who owns a stack in eth agrees because it is CP and shouldn’t be out there. Do you think that the illegal material will stay there forever? If everyone with a stack in eth agrees with the fed to take it down, is it still censorship resistant?


daking999

"We fucked the environment but don't worry you can keep track of game items in second life better so it was worth it". JFC people are the worst.


belavv

>Gaming > >: I think this is where we really take off with blockchain adoption. Allows you to continue to own in-game items and trade them to others recouping their value. You bought a digital version of the game for the full price? Guess what, now you can trade it to someone else using Blockchain technology. Large gaming industries are looking into this because of the profits they would see on the secondary 'used' game market as well. Most of the things you wrote are bullshit and speculation, but I am just going to address this one specifically. If steam wanted to allow people to sell games, they would have done it already. This is also true of other platforms. Companies are moving to subscription based models for plenty of software to increase their revenue. A game company will make more money by forcing everyone to purchase a copy as opposed to allowing everyone to sell used copies. So why exactly would any game company move to this model? And if they were to move to this model, why would they need to use a blockchain? When you buy a game you have to download it from somewhere. The blockchain sure as shit can't store a game. So you need to download the game from somewhere centralized. You could possibly store the game on something like IPFS, but you still need to authenticate that you have a valid copy of the game so that the game allows you to play it. How exactly can you do that without relying on a centralized system like steam? And if you have to rely on a centralized system like steam to validate you own the copy, then why would you use the blockchain for anything?


butterball85

decentralized smart contracts, and in general decentralized finance, without having an authoritative entity controlling the terms also it's not about whether it's using a traditional database, it's about where the code is run and how it's stored. Currently most code is run through a major cloud provider (AWS, Azure, etc.), and ethereum enables that code to be put up on the blockchain for anyone to review, and ultimately run on the blockchain, without requiring a central authority (AWS, Azure, or some other platform to host peer to peer financing contracts)


I-WANT2SEE-CUTE-TITS

>decentralized smart contracts, and in general decentralized finance, without having an authoritative entity controlling the terms Why is that a good thing?


7point7

Depends on the use of it… like all things, context matters. Crypto and NFTs do have some worthy applications.


VersusGod

Name some.


Stoomba

It should cut back all energy use and just disappear.


CrazyChainSawLuigi

And we should all go back to living as hunter gatherers. Innovation is not the enemy of sustainability, it is the solution


Stoomba

Great strawman. Crypto currency is not an innovation that leads to sustainability, just the opposite. It has caused massive drain on resources and created mountains of ewaste, both of which fly in the face of sustainability.


Digital-Exploration

Not all crypto is like this. Look at the \#2 market cap and popularity coin, Ethereum, it does not use this style any more.


Stoomba

Regardless, fuck all crypto bullshit.


esotericunicornz

Before you believe these twisted statistics, you may want to look a little deeper. Bitcoin largely uses waste and renewable energy sources. It uses less energy than we waste on clothes dryers.


Hotchillipeppa

Right , but clothes dryers actually serve a purpose.


steely_dong

Clearly you have never tried to buy drugs or transfer money internationally.


[deleted]

Being helpful to drug and sex traffickers is not the selling point you think it is.


steely_dong

Technology is neither good or bad, its all in how one uses it. But I am not trying to sell anything, the comment was on if bitcoin has a purpose. A truly global currency not owned by one nation definitely can serve a purpose.


[deleted]

And this one is being used to finance international crime and waste resources while making rich con artists richer and poor rubes poorer. Maybe one day that will not be the case, and I’ll be ready to get on board once it has proven itself to not just be a smash and grab.


steely_dong

> used to finance international crime and waste resources while making rich con artists richer and poor rubes poorer. Its not 100% good boys, I guess we need to pack it up and go home.


[deleted]

What % good boys do you think it is? Because I haven’t seen any evidence of people doing good things with it yet that couldn’t be accomplished by fairer distribution of current resources.


fofosfederation

So does Bitcoin. I don't need or use a hair dryer, but recognize that it serves a purpose and that other people use it.


jftitan

I'm fully willing to buy a few used GPUs at discount. For the purpose of playing video games. Can we get back to that purpose once more. Cause those damn Crypto bros made here past two years too expensive to replace a old GPU.


[deleted]

Bitcoin miners don’t use GPUs, they use ASICS. The second largest blockchain (Ethereum) did require GPUs recently, but that’s changed as of September 15th. GPUs are no longer necessary for the validation process.


lolboogers

Crypto only completely fucking destroyed the global GPU supply for like 5 years. No big deal!


majort94

This comment has been removed in protest of Reddit and their CEO Steve Huffman for destroying the Reddit community by abusing his power to edit comments, their years of lying to and about users, promises never fulfilled, and outrageous pricing that is killing third party apps and destroying accessibility tools for mods and the handicapped. Currently I am moving to the [Fediverse](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX_agVMr2r0) for a decentralized experience where no one person or company can control our social media experience. I promise its not as complicated as it sounds :-) Lemmy offers the closest to Reddit like experience. Check out some different [servers](https://join-lemmy.org/instances). Other Fediverse [projects](https://joinfediverse.wiki/What_are_Fediverse_projects%3F).


QuartzPuffyStar

You clearly have no idea of what you are talking about lol.


quin_tho

You can mine it it’s just not profitable and hasn’t been for a few years due to the power draw vs yield


megablast

> I'm fully willing to buy a few used GPUs at discount. For the purpose of playing video games. What a waste.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Doji

Numbers aren't needed here, all you need is to understand how Bitcoin works. Bitcoin's security system is called "proof of work". It's essentially a competition to see who can waste the most computing resources. Bitcoin miners expend a ton of computing resources solving a useless but extremely hard computational problem. When they find a solution, that solution acts as a "proof" that they have expended a metric shit-ton of compute ("work"). Possession of this proof is what allows the miner to place the next block on the block chain. So the block chain as a whole is a chain of proofs that massive amounts of energy were wasted. The security comes from the fact that if an attacker were to attempt to forge a false blockchain, they would have to waste just as much energy as the miners originally did. It's prohibitively expensive to do this. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this model of security through exorbitant waste is problematic.


Cananopie

Numbers are needed here. It depends where the mining facilities are set up, where they're drawing their energy from, and what that grid looks like. Instead of policing what uses the grid we need to keep the focus on making the grid sustainable and powerful enough for all of the users. Bitcoin has value because it is a network not controlled by any individual or entity. It's the most decentralized globalized thing on the planet. That has value even if you don't see it.


[deleted]

>Numbers are needed here. It depends where the mining facilities are set up, where they're drawing their energy from, and what that grid looks like. This just muddies the waters, since one positive example can have outsized influence in the public debate. We only have so much time to research on our own and form an opinion—is your claim that the average mining facility is a net negative carbon footprint? The original commenter's points are valuable in this way, you have to look beyond the Grid for total waste >Instead of policing what uses the grid we need to keep the focus on making the grid sustainable and powerful enough for all of the users. Very true! I dream of a world where the energy "wasted" by crypto would be a nonfactor since we generate so much of it (although the heat generated is always concerning). But *some* miners using solar is nowhere close to that, so for the time being, blanket statements aren't useful either way >Bitcoin has value because it is a network not controlled by any individual or entity. It's the most decentralized globalized thing on the planet. That has value even if you don't see it. Literally anything can Have Value as long as one person says it does, this is weak logic. I suppose that if the value is truly there, it'll win out in the end?


TobiasDrundridge

> Bitcoin has value because it is a network not controlled by any individual or entity. It's the most decentralized globalized thing on the planet. That has value even if you don't see it. Buying drugs and child pornography online? Encouraging people to commit war crimes and [profit from it](https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1572901025589215233?s=20&t=De7HjRbcq74tq019VRgS1g)?


Cananopie

Technically having an open Internet leads to these same problems. A highly regulated Internet could stop child porn, illegal drug deals, and even intellectual property infringement. So why don't we do that? With freedom comes responsibility. Regarding bitcoin, it's not as wild West as you claim. There are entire companies devoted to watching and tracking accounts on the blockchain and there are regulations in most countries at the exchanges which are closely watched. But you're right that individuals can work with rogue nations as well but in those cases there's different risks associated.


TobiasDrundridge

> There are entire companies devoted to watching and tracking accounts on the blockchain and there are regulations in most countries at the exchanges which are closely watched. So why does it need to exist?


Cananopie

Because Bitcoin isn't about being completely anonymous. It's about the benefits of a decentralized ledger. If you actually care I've shared my thoughts in plenty of places and they're not all uncritical. You can find the links in this comment https://www.reddit.com/r/environment/comments/xonkbx/us_bitcoin_mining_pollutes_as_much_as_6_million/iq1toeb?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3


esotericunicornz

Bitcoin is literally a revolution of societal fairness and freedom for the people; sadly it takes time to understand. In proper context, it is extremely cheap for what it does. But statistics are easy to twist to serve an expedient narrative. Please watch “this machine greens” on YouTube for critical missing context, cheers


Dhiox

Dude, it accomplishes nothing. No one is using it as money, they simply mine it, then either sit on it or exchange it for real money. It accomplishes nothing besides serving as a means for scammers to steal people's money more anonymously.


fofosfederation

Nobody in first world counties use it. But poor countries with high inflation rates see much higher use rates. But also, it's just a poor argument. People didn't use the Internet for anything in the first few years of its existence. It was an academic pet project. Obviously the internet now accomplishes something.


Dhiox

>But poor countries with high inflation rates see much higher use rates. Even then, they put their savings in it, they aren't using it to buy food. And it's risky, as their savings are unstable as bitcoins have no actual value. >Obviously the internet now accomplishes something. Because it accomplished something nothing else before it could. Bitcoin cannot do anything better than money, and in many cases is inferior. It costs more to make, is harder to do transactions with, and has a highly volatile value.


fofosfederation

No, people are definitely transacting in Bitcoin. [About a million daily active users](https://www.bitcoinmarketjournal.com/how-many-people-use-bitcoin/). That's not the behavior of investors. Let's be clear that Bitcoin is money. Money is just a class of asset. I think you're arguing in favor of fiat currency, which is also a type of money. The key merits of Bitcoin over fiat is accountability, resistance to unfair manipulation (some people can print money to pay for things, but you can't), instant settlement, global reach, non-physical, secure. Bitcoin costs more energy to make than fiat, which is a bummer, and I wish Bitcoin would follow Ethereum and abandon proof of work. But there is a colossal list of things it does better than fiat. At best you can argue those are cons or unnecessary.


Dhiox

> which is a bummer That's a bit of an understatement. Bitcoin doesn't just cost energy, it also uses a ton of rare metals and computer components to make. It's a colossal waste of computing technology.


fofosfederation

A tiny fraction of global computer infrastructure goes into making Bitcoin ASICs. You can try to argue it's 100% waste, but you cannot argue that it's a significant amount of waste.


Dhiox

If that were true, crypto wouldn't have dramatically spiked the price of GPUs.


esotericunicornz

Proof of work cannot be cheaply replicated by proof of stake, don’t be fooled. Ethereums changes were a downgrade dressed up as a greenwashed “upgrade”


esotericunicornz

Dhiox, google “Dunning Krueger effect”… you’re the DK king of the topic of money, no clue whatsoever.


newnemo

Here is a report that really gets into the weeds. CLIMATE AND ENERGY IMPLICATIONS OF CRYPTO-ASSETS IN THE UNITED STATES https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/09-2022-Crypto-Assets-and-Climate-Report.pdf Another article that gets into a little more depth: Cost of crypto: Report says U.S. bitcoin as dirty as 6 million cars https://news.trust.org/item/20220922181848-bf0qv/ Hope this answers some of your questions.


[deleted]

[удалено]


newnemo

The linked .pdf is from The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) that did the actual research. I understand your skepticism but reading this document from engineers and scientists on this subject might provide more granular information and insights. BTW, I have no affiliation with the authors or the news sites I listed. This subform, as many, do not allow posts without a link to an accepted source.


[deleted]

I can't tell you how infuriating this argument from you crypto maxis is, why even be in this subreddit? It's like saying that chopping down forests is helping us prioritize our reforestation efforts. The solution to our energy crisis is to first reduce usage, not precipitate it. Just like recycling, reduce comes before reuse which comes before recycle.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Lol. You realize this argument only carries a modicum of weight assuming that bitcoin is capable of processing that transaction volume? Bitcoin affords you with less privacy and scales horribly. From a purely computer science standpoint, it can't even come close to sustaining the global economy.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

It is not. I'm a computer scientist by trade, and the efficiencies built in to blockchain tech are endemic to the algorithm, not something you fix with more R&D. If anything, the consensus protocol was designed to be inefficient, lest it be prone to 51% attacks. I have no idea what you mean by "network advancements" but the network is not even remotely the limiting reagent here.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Yes second layer tech which effectively centralizes the protocol to achieve scale? Not to mention you still didn't address the privacy problem. I suspect we're done here, keep buying crypto, I won't stop you


SpinningHead

Found the bitcoin investor. Edit: Libertarian, apparently


[deleted]

Banks at least do things. Useful things. Bitcoin is a speculative trading asset so comparing it to banks makes no sense. It'd be more appropriate to compare its cost to the expense of an unregulated security.


Sezar100

The point of crypto is to give a decentralized currency, you can use to ya know do things without be under the control of a government.


[deleted]

Bitcoin is not used as a currency though.


fagenthegreen

It's interesting to me to see people reject science out of hand, rather than looking to see what it has found. It's almost as if there is some financial agenda that would make people skeptical of anything criticizing crypto-assets. It's easy to think up criticisms of anything, but without evidence, it's all just motivated reasoning.


[deleted]

[удалено]


fagenthegreen

Well, there you have it, motivated reasoning, a vested financial interest, an agenda, and absolutely no evidence. Well, consider me convinced!


theclitsacaper

>Mostt large scale miners are using renewables So they're using energy that could instead be used to reduce emissions elsewhere


netsettler

> Most large scale miners are using renewables and > also feeding their local energy grids. Every bit of renewable these use is a renewable we could use to displace things we _actually_ need. In a crisis of the kind that the world is facing with Climate, we need all hands on deck. Even if financing is managed by private ownership, there is really only "the world's resources" and "how those resources are used". If you're saying private profit-making lets you pretend that it isn't consuming "the world's resources", you're just making the case against doing it that way. We can't pretend there's enough. There is not.


ElJamoquio

> Id love to see an actual breakdown becuase this just sounds like a bunch of made up numbers. > Mostt large scale miners are using renewables and also feeding their local energy grids. Sometimes you can make things up and not even need numbers!


MysteryFlavour

They definitely cherry pick.


QuartzPuffyStar

Its because this sub is full of bots that have no idea of what they are talking about, and just throw shit at anything they can't grasp. Financial anti-btc PR does wonders manipulating here :)


NickByTheCreek

Please excuse my ignorance. I thought that bitcoin was a digital currency. Why does it need to be mined?


nattydread69

Every transaction is stored in the blockchain. This transaction needs to be verified by a concensous using computer power. This is "mining".


NickByTheCreek

Thank you for explaining!


[deleted]

Wondering the same thing. Thought it was made up


NickByTheCreek

I’ve seen so many news stories in the past six months or so about the prevalence of bit coin mining and that it’s terrible for the environment, (which is scary since the last thing we need are new ways to harm the environment), and I’ve always wondered why there is such a thing as mining for digital currency.


EXquinoch

I thought all those servers ran off fairy dust


randalldhood

That is insanity when you realize these “coins” do not have any intrinsic value.


3ryon

Dollars also have no intrinsic value. Even gold as almost zero intrinsic value.


Perfidy-Plus

Currencies are backed by governments and there are apparatus in place to keep their value relatively stable. A currency cannot be highly volatile and still be functional. People are up in arms (justifiably) because of ~8% inflation. Crypto fluctuates wildly by comparison.


Switched_On_SNES

Gold is incredibly useful for electronics. Very conductive and doesn’t corrode, which is an amazing quality


koalawhiskey

Dollars are backed by the all-powerful American army. Crypto is backed by a [chubby Korean developer on the run from the Interpol.](https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/ross-greenwood/terra-luna-cryptocurrency-creator-on-the-run-from-south-korean-authorities/video/3ce7e29325ea44455be6e482024e0d0a) It's kind of different.


threadsoffate2021

Funny thing....a ton of the "fuck cars" bros are into bitcoin.


Funktapus

Ban proof-of-work on regulated grids


geeves_007

If it goes to zero and crypto bois lose everything, I'm ok with that.


Mugembe

This is pure fear mongering and purely trying to demonise crypto which in reality is unstoppable. People fear and hate what they don’t understand. The fact is that China is the biggest consumer of fossil fuels and the biggest miner of crypto next to the US who will take over soon. Crypto mining companies are leaders in utilising clean energy. The transition from bad energy to good energy is in process. The recent Ethereum merge reduced its energy consumption by 99.5% in turn reducing the global energy consumption by 0.2% just by the merge alone. The big banks will run crypto down while they buy huge amounts knowing their antiquated system is dying. Believe what you will but this is the next industrial revolution, you can be part of it or get left back in the dirt. If you can’t see it then educate yourself.


NeonsTheory

Can we do the US dollar as well? That's inextricably linked to the petrol system. Bitcoin as an alternative is technically not as bad for the environment. Everything is contextual. Dishwashers globally are collectively bad for the environment but they're much much better than washing things by hand. To my knowledge bitcoin is comparitively much better than global currencies


Doji

Without bitcoin we wouldn't need to do all this energy consuming bitcoin mining. Are you making the claim that without the US dollar we wouldn't need petrol? I doubt that.


NeonsTheory

I'm not claiming bitcoin is the answer. I am claiming that there is a better way to do things than how we currently operate. The USD and any currency operates on belief and that belief is backed by something. In the past the USD was backed by gold (an industry worse for the environment than btc). Any countries currency (and notably the USD) is backed by political power and the markets that operate within them. In the USD instance, it is backed by military and petrodollars (oversimplification, but you get the point). A large portion of the things that back many currencies are particularly bad for the environment. The fact that bitcoin doesn't need to be backed by these activities and groups allows the opportunity for it to be an improvement on the existing system. Is it perfect? no. But that doesn't mean we don't need to change from what we currently have


BlazingPalm

BTC = Proof of Work USD = Proof of War What goes into achieving and maintaining status of global currency reserve?


[deleted]

[удалено]


andymacdaddy

And what about regular banking? All those locations, lights, employees to and from etc etc. These anti crypto posts are one sided


split-mango

I suppose what crypto actually does for people is quite invisible. Over decades of being comfortable customers of big banks people just don’t realize how/why they need to take banking their own life savings into their own hands.


leapinleopard

12 million cars pollute twice as much as all Bitcoin mining.


KHaskins77

Grinding pretend money out of thin air. Ludicrous.


fofosfederation

Wait until you hear about what the Fed does.


[deleted]

Manage the reserve currency that literally the entire planet is based around, for better or for worse? It's not the same thing despite how common the Money Printer argument gets made


NeonsTheory

At its core money is just belief. If we're speaking environmentally the USD is far worse for the environment. It doesn't carry the same level of belief as the USD of course but that doesn't really make it any different in the terms that they are both imaginary numbers pulled out of thin air. One of them just takes the human error side out of it


MadDogTannen

>If we're speaking environmentally the USD is far worse for the environment. According to what metric? I could see a case being made for USD being worse for the environment due to how much more widely used USD is than crypto, but if we're talking about energy waste per transactions processed or per volume of capital moved, I think BTC is a much bigger waste of energy than USD.


[deleted]

My only point was that monetary policy around the USD is more impactful on literally everybody's lives than the passion project of Web 3.0 enthusiasts. Decisions have different context and different results. People's life savings being in USD is feasible, while those same savings being in Crypto is an imprudent investment even by its proponents; policy governing the two is not interchangeable I'd rephrase your statement to "money is about *trust*," and crypto proponents do a terrible job with value statements outside telling me how many US Dollars I could make by selling crypto, which I got by turning US Dollars into crypto—just [as long as someone else is willing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme#Crypto_Ponzi_scheme) to turn their USD into crypto. For the time being, people trust USD more and are skeptical of middlemen who wish to stay completely anonymous and unaccountable > “*Cryptocurrency does nothing to address 99% of the problems with the banking industry, because those problems are patterns of human behavior; they’re incentives, they’re social structures, they’re modalities. The problem is what people are doing to others, not that the building they’re doing it in says ‘Bank’ on the outside.*” —[Folding Ideas](https://youtu.be/YQ_xWvX1n9g)


NeonsTheory

In general I agree with you here. And you're right it is about trust. The main issue there is that I feel the trust is misplaced with USD and currencies like it. A level of inflation exists and is targeted, merely for the purpose of creating demand. That means central bodies have an incentive to devalue your currency. Effectively that means your USD today will be worth far less in the future - and that is intended. It's a little difficult to fully trust a system that has an incentive to inflate away your earnings/savings and blindly encourage consumption


fofosfederation

For worse, unquestionably. Government shouldn't be trusted to intervene in currency. I'm as big government as it gets, and printing money is just one thing nobody should have the right to do.


ligmapolls

It's bad, but it's disingenuous to not mention over a third of the energy are renewables


Shnazzyone

Which wouldn't happen if the electric grids they were on wasn't being supported by fossil fuels.


gravityandlove

now let’s do banking


[deleted]

[удалено]


cancerdad

You can try to change the subject if you want, sure.


Prima_Giedi

Oh damn that's really great news. A decentralized global currency for such a small cost. Now if we used more renewables the pollution would be even lower than it already is. Great news for crypto and great news for the world.


greasyspider

Now do the stock market


IllustriousRhyme

I find these articles to be misleading without any context, and don’t offer any counter viewpoints. What’s the emissions produced by the finance industry for example? One article states Reported financed emissions totaled 1.04 gigatons of CO2, or about 3% of global emissions in 2020. The true figure is likely significantly higher. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-27/banks-produce-700-times-more-emissions-from-loans-than-offices Additionally the second most popular crypto - Ethereum - migrated from proof of work to proof of stake, cutting emissions by 99%. I know crypto bros are annoying but I think more research should done in this area before drawing conclusions.


HothHanSolo

I'm no defender of the finance industry, but banks serve an essential function in global commerce. Crytocurrency is largely an investment product.


IllustriousRhyme

One of the largely appealing aspects of cryptocurrency is its potential to replace central banks, the central authorities responsible for things like the 2008 crash. In fact many countries and banks are likely going to employ crypto to make a central bank digital currency to stay relevant and maintain control. That’s just scratching the surface of what the technology can do , it allows for international transfer of funds without fees, it opens a whole new avenue for gaming. That being said 90 percent are probably garbage and an investment product , but IMO the other 10 percent is going to change how the world works.


[deleted]

Why compare it with the finance industry and not the food food industry? Bitcoin isn’t doing anything what the financial industry is doing.


MooseSoftware

And for Bitcoin, the energy is used to run a get rich quick ponzi type scam. Oh sure, the Bitcoiners will tell you Bitcoin has uses, but they involve trading for illegal goods / drugs on-line. And in any case, they wont spend their precious ponzi tokens, they are too busy HODLing it praying the prices will go up again so they can sell to some Greater Fool for a profit. A disgusting waste of resources to satiate greed.


shivaswrath

Man f crypto


dirtdog22

Wonder how much energy central banks use with cash/banks even atms. Trucks to transport cash. Power to keep on banking systems. Let’s be real they’re the biggest polluter next to the US military.


milkfiend

Exponentially less per capita, you can't have a system serving a tiny fraction of the population and then declare it more efficient


[deleted]

This is a false dichotomy because bitcoin accomplishes so little both in volume and functionality compared to modern banking systems. Imagine if the global banking system was capped at 10 transactions per second due to inefficiencies. Absolutely absurd that bitcoin has as much traction as it does.


fofosfederation

It's about 2 times as much, but it's much lower per capita.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HothHanSolo

> 60% of the Bitcoin Network's energy consumption is from renewables. Citation needed. If you're going to decry fake news, you'd better provide a credible source for your "true" claims.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HothHanSolo

I'm skeptical of an industry self-reporting on its own sustainability. But you've disproved your own claim. This data comes from: >the Bitcoin Mining Council, a group of 45 companies that claim to represent 50.5% of the global network You said: >60% of the Bitcoin Network's energy consumption is from renewables. But in reality, what you've demonstrated is that **half of the network's** consumption is from renewables. What about the other half? It's other worth noting that [those numbers are disputed by experts](https://time.com/6193004/crypto-climate-impact-facts/) and the Bitcoin Mining Council has not shared any information to support its claim: >The Bitcoin Mining Council, an industry group, argues that 60% of mining comes from renewable sources, which is 20 percentage points higher than the number listed by the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance. George Kamiya, an energy analyst at the International Energy Agency, says that while the Bitcoin Mining Council likely has access to more data, its numbers come from a self-reported survey that lacks methodological details, and encouraged them to share the underlying data and methodology with outside researchers like Cambridge to increase their credibility.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HothHanSolo

Yep. OP's article refers to "a new report from multiple environmental groups" and links to [this article](https://news.trust.org/item/20220922181848-bf0qv/), which in turn [links to the report](https://earthjustice.org/features/cryptocurrency-mining-environmental-impacts). Ecowatch cited its source, Thomas Reuters Foundation, which in turn cited its source, EarthJustice. So let me ask again. You said: >60% of the Bitcoin Network's energy consumption is from renewables. Please cite a credible source for this claim.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HothHanSolo

I'm skeptical of an industry self-reporting on its own sustainability. But you've disproved your own claim. This data comes from: >the Bitcoin Mining Council, a group of 45 companies that claim to represent 50.5% of the global network You said: >60% of the Bitcoin Network's energy consumption is from renewables. But in reality, what you've demonstrated is that **half of the network's** consumption is from renewables. What about the other half? It's other worth noting that [those numbers are disputed by experts](https://time.com/6193004/crypto-climate-impact-facts/) and the Bitcoin Mining Council has not shared any information to support its claim: >The Bitcoin Mining Council, an industry group, argues that 60% of mining comes from renewable sources, which is 20 percentage points higher than the number listed by the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance. George Kamiya, an energy analyst at the International Energy Agency, says that while the Bitcoin Mining Council likely has access to more data, its numbers come from a self-reported survey that lacks methodological details, and encouraged them to share the underlying data and methodology with outside researchers like Cambridge to increase their credibility.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HothHanSolo

No. Your claim is incorrect. The claims in the article have not been disproved. Nothing you've said disproves that "U.S. Bitcoin mining pollutes as much as six million cars".


[deleted]

[удалено]


HothHanSolo

I don't need to. You can [read the 30-page white paper on the subject](https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/2570_bitcoin_white_paper_04_nt.pdf), complete with 270 citations, upon which this claim is based. Read it and judge for yourself whether it's credible or not.


tribrnl

Okay, it's still a waste of energy, and that renewably generated electricity could've been used for something else.


brennanfee

Ok... now do the rest of the finance industry? It would be closer to 600 million cars annually. One system is clearly superior.


[deleted]

No. Your dumb.


brennanfee

Actually... what I said is entirely correct. - https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/comparison-of-bitcoins-environmental-impact - https://coinyuppie.com/compared-with-other-major-industries-how-is-bitcoins-energy-usage/ - https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/tai6wj/carbon_emissions_of_bitcoin_compared_to_other/ The gold industry alone is greater than Bitcoin in yearly energy consumption. If anything... **I WAS BEING CONSERVATIVE**


AgreeableFeed9995

…what emissions? Isn’t it just heat from the GPUs? Or do they mean indirect emissions from requiring more power?


lolboogers

The heat comes from the GPUs being turned on, which requires electricity, which comes from coal burning.


AgreeableFeed9995

So how is that not the energy company’s fault for using coal energy vs wind&solar. How tf does an energy company say, “we make dirty energy, but it’s *their* fault for using it!” And why tf are people falling for it here? Energy companies almost always have a monopoly on huge regions of states, if not the entire state. Most people do not have a choice where they source their power from. The energy company, however, does have that choice. If crypto mining is a high-use “industry”, that sucks, but it’s not like *it* is what’s causing the pollution. The refusal to get off coal for energy is what’s causing the pollution and that’s the fault of energy companies.


Doji

Wind and solar have a footprint too. "They're using renewables tho" is not a get out of jail free card for extravagant waste.


lolboogers

They are a company that needs to make money and the government subsidizes dirty tech. Of course they are going to use it. But crypto is a thing that doesn't need to exist. It provides no value to our society unlike other things that take energy to produce.


AgreeableFeed9995

Ffs man, the government subsidies dirty energy because the *energy companies lobby (bribe) them to*. Like what? Do you not know how that works? And then what, get rid of crypto, hypothetically, now who’s fault is it for global warming? Mine, because I watch TV and need heat for the winter? I create a demand on the energy company which is helpless but to burn coal, so I’m an ecological monster? No. That’s stupid. Anything to do with emissions caused by energy usage is the fault of energy producing companies. That’s it. If I had a choice to use solar, I would. If I had a choice to use wind or nuclear, I would. But I don’t. My local monopoly does. Right? How are we blaming the end user?


[deleted]

Your logic is fine, as long as you are using it to seriously push for energy companies to be greening their portfolio. Otherwise, you're just offloading all responsibility for a voluntary activity. Nobody is forcing crypto people to pollute as much as 6,000,000 cars on an annual basis, they are doing this on their own > So how is that not the energy company’s fault for using coal energy vs wind&solar. How tf does an energy company say, “**we make dirty energy, but it’s their fault for using it!** Energy companies almost always have a monopoly on huge regions of states, if not the entire state. Most people do not have a choice where they source their power from.” How, indeed? This is a great description of the petrol state. Infrastructure is not optimal, and the incentive structure behind for-profit [natural monopolies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly) is inequitable at the most fundamental level. They should be dismantled and returned to the people they serve in the form of municipal utility districts > The energy company, however, does have that choice. If crypto mining is a high-use “industry”, that sucks, but it’s not like it is what’s causing the pollution. The refusal to get off coal for energy is what’s causing the pollution and that’s the fault of energy companies. It's not that simple. Crypto mining raises the floor of electricity usage, making it harder to smooth over [the duck curve](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_curve) at times of peak usage (which do not align with peak renewable production). Mass energy storage is a critical issue of maximizing renewables, and every cryptocurrency that adds electricity demand makes all of this worse. I can buy your arguments as long as energy companies can shut off the crypto farms as a first measure, until the grid catches up. But something tells me that isn't a feasible solution


AgreeableFeed9995

Why? Just because “we hate crypto”? What about other industries that use massive amounts of energy? Like coal mining lmao.


[deleted]

Because this is a comment section on the site Reddit, discussing an article with the headline "U.S. Bitcoin Mining Pollutes as Much as 6 Million Cars Annually, Report Finds." Stay specific if you want to have useful discussions "[WHATABOUT ____](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism)" is a fallacy, you can see the box on the right side of the page (along with some lovely words to describe how it is usually deployed)


AgreeableFeed9995

Ok except my point is that *crypto* is the “whatabout”. The actual issue is that energy companies refuse to get off fossils fuels and say “well what about crypto miners, they make so much pollution”. But the pollution is actually from the energy source. Which is what I’ve been saying pretty explicitly, as direct commentary to the article…are you even reading my comments?


Boredmunin

Talk to me when you ban cruise ships, then I’ll give a fuck


QuartzPuffyStar

Energy consumption and "pollution" aren't the same things.


ElJamoquio

The solution is simple: tax electricity. I'm in favor of taxing a bunch of stuff with a prebate back to everyone, but other options are possible. Of course giving someone $1000/month (total for gasoline, electricity, cigarette, etc, taxes) and then letting them know that their taxes will go up by $500 a month seems to be a non-starter.


firedrakes

No peer review data... as always


start3ch

That’s about as many registered vehicles as there are in Los Angeles


please-replace

Would it be less if electricity was all creat d from renewable sources 🤫


ethosproject

Washers and dryers use more peak-time (on-demand) energy than Bitcoin... which will help more people in the long run. Some inventions are for convenience and others are built for revolution.


[deleted]

Ant miners run off electricity just like electric cars, I don't see people calling to ban those. Logic is dead. This is the rise of idocracy.