*do

If people want a new currency free from government control I say let them. If people get wealthy from that new currency I say what's the problem? There are a lot of struggling people right now that are using crypto as a way to make money and lift themselves from poverty.
In case you haven't heard all the jobs are gone. 4x worse than 2008.
And not all crypto is mined like Bitcoin.

Crypto didn't bring the climate to its current state, that has been going on over the past 100 years.

If you want to talk about pollutio, look at the US military. They are the largest polluters in the world from a single organization. They literally just drive around aircraft carriers and fly fighter jets all day long. Do you realize how much fuel that uses? Trust me, I live next to 5 military bases and they fly those giant cargo jets right over my house.

And when more renewables are implemented into the system that is how Bitcoin mining will be powered in the future. But fossil fuels cannot be sustainable. We do have some nuclear powered vessels, but that is a small part of the fleet.

And when we have States like Florida that pretty much make solar-powered illegal that creates another roadblock for sustainable power for cryptocoin mining.

Eco Fundamentalism = pretending technophobia is love of nature.

@anonymiss NO

@anonymiss @ꂵꄲ꒤ꋊ꓄ꋬ꒐ꋊ ꃳ꒐ꀘꏂ 𝔸𝕕𝕕𝕚𝕔𝕥≈⁴²⁰≈
How many hashes does it take for a black hole sun?

And yes, short of a "free energy" means to back blockchain, ALL blockchains inherent to their nature require increasing amounts of resources to sustain.

So there's the centralised, government controlled money and people complain. Inflationary by design, it devalues over time and pushes people to consumerism (I think a few decades ago in the US they wanted to put an actual expiry date on banknotes to push spending).

Then comes a libre, decentralised project that is not controllable by a single entity by design, it allows people to literally store money in their mattress again and people still complain. Seriously, you need to decide what you want.

Just a small reminder: the current money system is not green at all. Petroldollar is a thing. Banks, ATMs etc all need energy to run.
Bitcoin mining is concentrating more and more in areas with cheap energy, where renewables produce more than the power grid could support. By using that cheap, extra energy near the production site, server farms are able to offer really competitive hosting prices. If bitcoin replaced the fiat currency everywhere, I believe we'd live on a greener planet indeed.

How many hashes does it take for a black hole sun?

None. You'd literally need to toss 19 more Suns into the Sun to hope to get a black hole someday in the far far future. Given that the Sun takes up 99.8% of all the mass in the Solar System, you could throw all the mining hardware and their immaterial hashes into the Sun, the human miners, the entire planet they're standing on along with Venus, Jupiter and all the chaps and still make no difference whatsoever. It'd do literally nothing.

ALL blockchains inherent to their nature require increasing amounts of resources to sustain

False. Bitcoin doesn't need miners. Sure, lots of miners means that no single entity could take control of the blockchain, but keep in mind that hash solving requires time stays constant and complexity is adjusted instead. It means that loads of miners won't "make" more blocks, rather they'd drive complexity up (which is why GPU mining is no longer profitable). If all miners except 1 disappeared tomorrow complexity would decrease dramatically and blocks would still get churned at the same rate as now. Bitcoin would still work just fine, although of course anyone could take over the network at that point.

Really, these arguments are several years old now and have been addressed over and over. At least try to read something before commenting the same tired arguments for the millionth time.

@anonymiss @Michele Santullo one can remove the miners and the blockchain still takes energy to sustain.

For that (quite literal) "matter", throwing 77 some odd TerraWatts of power per hour into what in large part is mining certainly doesn't help matters.... and that's just the BitCoin blockchain alone.

But hey, obviously you can "DeFi" all sensibility and bullockschain if you want to, but have some decency.... there's no need to "scale" such into sucking everyone into it with you (like a black hole)

#MoneyIsDead (and good riddance.....)

You also take energy to move around and pay for things.
However bitcoin itself doesn't have to require an always-on computer for doing transactions. Physical bitcoins exist and the idea could be expanded on.

@anonymiss If that reasoning makes 77 + TerraWatts of power per hour of maintenance, 666 Kw of power for a transaction, or the absurd amounts of resources of energy for smart contract transactions make sense to you.....

At that, that's all prior to even beginning to tackle issues of known prolific chipset vulnerabilities (ala Intel ME) that negate meaningful privacy keys, "A.I." bot trading issues, etc.
again, you can bullockschain if you want to.

So just consider having some decency and don't look at imposing ur scale to #InfiniteAbsurdityAndBeyond

Good points, guys. This argument crops up every couple of years, good to see it's not discussed without some valid counterweight anymore

Yes, it makes much more sense than many other things we're wasting energy on, these days.

If CPU vulnerabilities are a concern, then that also applies to the SSL certificate when your computer or the ATM connects your bank's server.

Energy-wise, if a significant part of the 77 TeraWatts, which I'm taking for good from you, is from renewables, or on the way to become so, then I don't see the problem.

Besides spitting on the new libre technologies, do you have any practical advice?

@anonymiss @Michele Santullo
1. "makes much more sense than many other things we're wasting energy on, these days."
Such is a statement of opinion, subsequently, it can not be stated as any sort of meaningful fact beyond ones own opinion. What I would say on such a matter is, at current, the current economic system isn't a "free energy" space, as such, 77 TerraWatts of power being dedicated to solving what amounts to high tech (arbitrary) sudoku and maintaining a record of it seems a waste to me. That energy came at a cost..... that cost could have gone to feeding people, housing homeless, or any number of things, but instead it went to solving what amounts to sudoku and keeping a record and is rather rapidly increasingly doing so. That strikes me as an equal to suicide economics and not anything at all better than the dominant monetary economics that preceded it.

2. "If CPU vulnerabilities are a concern, then that also applies to the SSL certificate when your computer or the ATM connects your bank's server."
Hence I stated #MoneyIsDead for such reason (among many others).
If Money is dead, so are the politics emergent from it's economics.
At best, things become zombies walking. Seems a good idea to move on from the land of the dead.

3. "Besides spitting on the new libre technologies, do you have any practical advice?"
While I do not at all claim to have "The Answer", it seems to me that among lessons to be gained:
A. Be wary of placing blind faith into a centrally controlled abstract (i.e. "money") as applied to a mass for purposes of economics (aka "energy exchange"). Whether or not that central control takes the form of a cult of personality (i.e. politician, priest, celebrity) or institution (central banks, Enterprise market monopolies, "A.I." system[s], etc.) is insignificant to the end (an end that seems little more than at best, "advanced slavery").
B. Take responsibility for ones actions both in regard to self and ones place within their local (and greater) community.
C. Consider and continually review what the idea of "Be Excellent To Each Other" (as well as self) means and seek to apply such to the best of ones knowledge.
D. Consider and continually review what the idea of "Energy can be neither created nor destroyed" means in regard to both self and (what may appear as) beyond self.

But again, I do not at all claim to have "The Answer", but the above seem to appear as practical emergent lessons to be gained from the world current.

Aren't there consensus mechanisms other than Proof of Work?

Even Proof of Work can be implemented in a way that doesn't explode in its computational requirements like Bitcoin does.

Actually Bitcoin is driving the adoption of renewable energies. Because they are the only ones that are cheap enough.
https://philippsandner.medium.com/the-green-bitcoin-theory-how-are-bitcoin-electricity-consumption-and-green-energy-related-b541b23424ab

And PoS has a long way to go still to prove reliable. Or else it happens what happened to the Steem blockchain:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oh6Uw_ZH2A

@Rob Neither
The point in having PoW is that it is commercially unfeasible to attack the blockchain. That wouldn't work if you reduce the computational requirements. This is why Bitcoin never was compromised and at this point now never will be. And this is why its the most trusted crypto and the most valuable.
They are even shifting mining from China to the scandinavian countries and Canada.

@Alien (A23P)
Ad Intel ME: You have your significant values of cryptocurrencies not on your desktop. You have it on your smartphone or even better on a hardware wallet. Private keys are safer there ;)

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander no, they're really not any much safer on most smartphones and hardware wallets are bound to hit systems that are vulnerable to exploit.

hardware wallets are bound to hit systems that are vulnerable to exploit.
You should educate yourself on that. You can use hardware wallets even on compromised systems. Thats the point of having them, the transaction gets signed in the hardware wallet and nowhere else.

Good point with the increased push for green energy innovation by BTC usage @Murkas Wylander. And I was watching that whole Steem thing as it unfolded I remember, what a shitshow. That project's first red flag though was how it was so complex and layered, the economics of it I mean. Three tokens at varying levels of "currency", that was the worst of it all for me to understand. And then of course everyone showed up quite literally hunting for attention because it meant money. It was very interesting to watch develop, I can say that much.

Interesting though. Have you been on it recently? It's basically all Korean and as much if not more Chinese as English with what little isn't.

Also a good debate on Bitcoin's energy usage, with some deeper points from both sides: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26088455

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander
interesting on the hardware wallets.
granted, cant say i find that reason to keep chasing down means to keep money in use or play as to do such is largely to miss out on lessons to have been learned.

@zulu great points in that discussions! I also posted this link on another post https://www.buybitcoinworldwide.com/mining/china/ but I think you have already seen it? maybe interesting to other people here

@Alien (A23P) I'd rather pay with bitcoin than carry my goats, cows and potatoes with me all the time for bartering. I might have troubles going through the metro gates, for example.

@anonymiss @Michele Santullo
no where was anything about carrying goats, cows, and potatoes around anywhere implied. At that, cows, goats, or potatoes as money doesn't negate the lessons of what happens with centrally controlled abstracts for economics.

Perhaps contributing in some way that may seem fitting to community and situational conditions may be more apt than blindly jumping down monetary paths already shown problematic. Maybe you help build a house, teach a child, watch a dog, cook a meal, garden, keep someone company, any number of things really.

And yes, there may even be community and situational conditions, where for whatever reason, the community simply chose to remain obsessed with money and subsequently the situational conditions were fitting to money. Again as noted, "you can bollockschain if you want to", the issue is more one of, as is currently going on, where such economics are imposed on others. Where "blockchain" becomes a blind answer to a question ill defined AND "How does it scale" becomes the question to an answer ill defined.

At current, with no serious major public address or inform, it's just blockchain this and blockchain that all over money, all over State and local infrastructures, and all without giving any major effort toward public inform or input. It's just being imposed on others in a manner of "your economics will blockchain whether you like it or not!"
again, much the same way that prior monetary economics and technocracy were just as imposed.
So much of it, at it's best, is just an updated form of the same slavery and suicide based economics masquerading as something new.

Less slavery and/or suicide economics the goal, "Does it scale" isn't a persistent question and "blockchain" is not a persistent answer of imposition.

@Alien (A23P)
Who stood up for Bitcoin when it was created? Why so few only took the chance to participate?
Communities, you had your chance. But nevertheless Gamestop shows us institutional investers can be fought back.

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander
Much of what you just stated are flat out false arguments.
For one, I know I myself was a HUGE advocate for BitCoin. But I, like most other BitCoin advocates, was largely in a position of privilege.
For one, I'd both studied and been educated in monetary economics in ways not only most hadn't, but that most are intentfully steered toward misunderstanding. (in this manner, I was like many, if not most, early advocates of BTC)
For second, I'd both studied and been educated in natures of both IT networking systems and security/cryptography in ways most hadn't. (again, this was not uncommon in [early] BTC circles)
For third, to be active in BTC circles was largely a 1st world privilege in and of itself. 2nd and 3rd world communities were largely left near completely uninformed, uninvolved, and often unable to even access.
So no, there was no major chance given to greater public community. Just as now, when blockchain implementations are going on all over the place on infrastructure with the greater general public INTENTFULLY left unaware, uniformed, and often unable to even participate with meaningful say. In essence, it's a process of both witting and unwitting imposition on the greater public by a technocratic class.
Such said, in the turn of 2010's, the primary reasons I supported BTC were:
A. It was acting much more within it's designed and stated capacity as a transactional currency (even if simply within more underground and black market circles). It's worth noting here that the whole idea of BTC as a "store of value" was a later development.
B. I saw a need to break the strangle hold the Central Bank structure had on monetary economics and subsequently the global politics emergent from that dominant monetary economic structure.
*this is not to neglect mention that energy draws were not nearly what they are today AND meaningful public participation in the system was still possible.*

Will note of "B.", cryptocurrencies by and large proved successful.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

By 2013 major issues had began surfacing with BTC that were leading to new forms problems of centralized control. For brevity here, I'll simply note that I had commented in some detail regarding these issues both at the time and again years later in 2017.
A compendium of those writings can be found both here:
https://joindiaspora.com/posts/683225c0c11b0135496f0242ac110007
and here:
https://joindiaspora.com/posts/b24a7e40807001359b4d0242ac110007

I would describe the evolution of the situation as akin to a global economic and subsequent political "advanced slavery" issue that was addressed, a bomb was effectively set to it, but now, rather than set the bomb and RUN, a situation has emerged where the public is increasingly manipulated toward "How to learn to stop worrying and love the bomb" and are increasingly hugging the bomb!
(a very Dr. Strangelove like ethos to it all)

Gamestop is again a false argument. At it's best, Gamestop is little more than a public psychological operation and manipulation. I honestly find such manipulations sad and again, little more than the same old slavery and suicide rooted economics of the past masquerading as something new; specifically to incentivize (more like herd) unsuspecting/uneducated publics into a direction. As not to divert to far from the original topic, rather than head into what would be a large write of explanation(s) on natures of modern (monetary) economics and it's workings, I'll simply grant that I feel The Intercept did a nice job touching on SOME of the nature of the Gamestop affair:
https://theintercept.com/2021/01/31/fintech-biden-nominees-robinhood/

So what is your plan how could an alternative to "advanced slavery" look like?

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander
you're asking a question I already addressed, but I will restate as copy/pasta once more:

"Besides spitting on the new libre technologies, do you have any practical advice?" - @Michele Santullo

While I do not at all claim to have "The Answer", it seems to me that among lessons to be gained:
A. Be wary of placing blind faith into a centrally controlled abstract (i.e. "money") as applied to a mass for purposes of economics (aka "energy exchange"). Whether or not that central control takes the form of a cult of personality (i.e. politician, priest, celebrity) or institution (central banks, Enterprise market monopolies, "A.I." system[s], etc.) is insignificant to the end (an end that seems little more than at best, "advanced slavery").
B. Take responsibility for ones actions both in regard to self and ones place within their local (and greater) community.
C. Consider and continually review what the idea of "Be Excellent To Each Other" (as well as self) means and seek to apply such to the best of ones knowledge and ability.
D. Consider and continually review what the idea of "Energy can be neither created nor destroyed" means in regard to both self and (what may appear as) beyond self.

But again, I do not at all claim to have "The Answer", but the above seem to appear to me as practical emergent lessons to be gained from the world current in moves forward.

*this question was addressed a bit further in a near above comment in response to a statement regarding using BTC being more practical than cows, goats, and other farm animals as currency*

Money is just an expression for value, nothing more, nothing less.
What you really mean is wealth, and wealth is power. Money is just a vehicle to measure it.
Money (whichever) in its form today is inherently worth nothing, its a number in a computer, or a printed piece of paper.
All these points you made work only in an educated community. This won't happen. Well it could happen, but I am quite sure that mankind will be extinct before that.

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander when I say "money" I specifically mean
"A centrally controlled abstract as applied to a mass for purposes of economics (aka 'energy exchange')"

In that, Money IS MORE than an expression of value AND it is also something more than simply a debt instrument. In fact the expression of value is but an emergent property from the central control (whatever that may be) on the abstract (whatever that may be) as imposed on it's congregant mass.

In the most recent past, the Central Bank structure (headed by the BIS/Bank of International Settlements) was the chief (public facing) administrator of monetary control. In the more (dominant) current, the central control is arguably "A.I." system(s). Enter an economic and subsequent political age of "In The Algos We Trust" with a general mass public that's arguably more blind to the functioning (global) governance system than ever.

In regard to an "educated community", I think what can more honestly be stated from historical evidence is that intentful MISeducation of a mass works well to facilitate centralized control over a mass. In essence Advanced forms of slavery do not require whips and chains AND as the old saying goes
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

In as much, I would suggest that as part of the considerations in "Be Excellent To Each Other" there perhaps lay an idea that rather than purposely working energy (economics) toward miseducation, to instead more intently focus worked energy for both self and community toward the pursuit of truth.

In such end, and to reflect back on the original post question, the amount of resource energy currently being put into blockchain is astronomical and beats out the energy consumed of multiple entire countries! Practices that echo back to the monoliths (A.I.) in regard to planets of the book/film 2010.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYvvPZ6zwPE
or alternately
https://invidious.tube/watch?v=DYvvPZ6zwPE

So, is that something that works to facilitate "climate protection"?
Well there's a very observable QED of "NO", as it's not anything approaching "free (clean) energy" behind the energy consumption given blockchain(s) is observably VERY rapidly sky rocketing finite resource energy production uses and shooting things like CO2 emissions out the roof at exponential rates.
However, it is equally observable that IF the question were, "Is blockchain implemented under guises of being good for climate protection?"
In direct contrary to what is actually occurring, there oddly enough a very observable QED of "YES"
i.e. https://efforce.io/project
but that answer of "YES" is an answer that observably DOES NOT function in the pursuit of truth.

You would like to see education for the masses? Then start making your points in only a few, easy understandable sentences.
Here an example how this can be achieved in regards of blockchain and energy:
https://www.coindesk.com/the-last-word-on-bitcoins-energy-consumption

And BTW: Bitcoin itself would run on only 10 notebooks for all transactions:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty
So energy consumption is only a matter of tax/energy politics in the states. Its too simple to blame it on bitcoin. You would fall for the fake news the policitians and bankers tell you.

By the way, I've watched an explanation of Lightning on Youtube and it's a very promising technology. It's got some kinks that still need working, but overall it sounds convincing.
I knew about it of course, but it's interesting to understand a bit more about it.

I'm just saying that because too often we (me too) read discussions like the one on ycombinator that Zulu posted earlier and try to make an idea from what people are saying. And often people don't have a clue, or are biased and misrepresent things.

@Alien (A23P) I understand what you're trying to say and it's still a form of bartering. I believe in Sardinia, in some villages, during the 2009 crisis people organised a payment system where they'd write something they could do and pay for things with that. It works in a small reality but, imo, it breaks miserably when you need for example an airplane pilot, surgery... complex things. Say you sell flowers and you need surgery. Think to how many people you need to promise flowers in exchange for getting your life saved. What if the ambulance driver doesn't care for flowers? What if the loundry person for your hospital bed sheets hates you and your flowers? How many flowers do you need to give to the actual surgeon?
Sorry but it's really too utopistic. Money was not created by one person, it emerged as a need to make trades more practical. Banks emerged later and regulations changed uncountable times. Bitcoin promises to modernise a system that's been there for centuries, taking control away from the centralised institutions. It's not an imposition anymore than Linux is. If you weren't paying attention or weren't born when it was the right time, well sorry but it's not like the world can be re-invented every time each person comes of age.
Also, it's not true the bitcoin community is not accessible. They've had IRC channels since the beginning, and I'm sure most people in South America and Africa could easily access IRC if they wanted to. It's not like here in Europe we had advertisements either, it was an underground technology for us as much as it was for them.

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander
First, the politicians, largely both backed and themselves governed by monetary finance, ARE ANYTHING BUT anti-blockchain. Again as noted, while public focus is being placed else where it's full steam ahead on things blockchain.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/financial-services-and-commerce/the-fundamentals-of-risk-management-and-insurance-viewed-through-the-lens-of-emerging-technology-webinar.aspx
*though the implementations are global and FAR from limited to just the domestic U.S. as the example concentrates on, and again as prior noted, these are affairs that the general public is both left uninformed and non-participant in and hence imposition on a mass to simply OBEY*

Secondly, I already stated an issue of resource missallocation, chiefly
"That energy came at a cost..... that cost could have gone to feeding people, housing homeless, or any number of things, but instead it went to solving what amounts to sudoku and keeping a record and is rather rapidly increasingly doing so."

You seem to imply that "SOME" Hyrdo mining facilities are mining bitcoin and then rather than profit or power consolidation, are then selling off the bitcoin to undermine the State and greater central control and resolve issues of poverty and liberating individual choice options. I'd think such efforts would be considerably more known, but presuming they for some reason aren't, can you point to significant instances of such implications?
There is also ZERO address given to the drastic and rising energy resources devoted to blockchain (not to be confused for meaning only BitCoin) beyond that "some" of those energy generation cases are more efficient than others. This is tantamount to saying "smog may be an issue, but sometimes things are produced through means that don't generate smog". A true statement that side steps the central issue.

And saying all BitCoin transactions could be handled on 10 notebooks is a bit of misnomer.
Bitcoin network average energy consumption per transaction compared to VISA network as of 2020(in kilowatt-hours)
*though as fore noted, most recent figures I've seen have things pinned more at 77 TerraWatts per hour*
Given enough time, I wouldn't be surprised if all the transactions could be handled on just 1 notebook, but that doesn't mean much of anything.

@anonymiss @Michele Santullo I'm not sure how much you've lived or spent time outside of 1st world conditions, but it simply isn't true that it's a total norm for small towns and villages in even Mexico to actively be readily educated in areas of monetary theory, I.T., and being provided opportunity to meaningfully participate in blockchain and cryptocurrency circles.
The best example I can think of to exemplify such is to simply head into a near by poorer neighborhood in your area and see how much education is going on regarding monetary theory, I.T. infrastructure and workings, or things blockchain and cryptocurrency and then take into consideration that the results you find in that area are still first world!

And again, I can only stress that the current conditions and workings are an evolution of GENERATIONS of "panem et circenses" (bread and circuses) treatments toward the general public. I'm not sure taking a generations and centuries (even thousand+ years of) long dictate of working purposely AGAINST the pursuit of truth, notably when it's showing very observable faults and breaks, and then use that as the bench mark of how to move forward. To do such, at least IMO, is not to act anti-utopic as much as it's simply to continue in a "same as it ever was" manner under an excuse of "but it's been this way for generations". It's to neglect responsibility both for one's own actions and their actions toward community.

The REAL WORK, the real HARD WORK even perhaps, comes in first taking recognition and responsibility for where things are, learning from that, changing behavior, and moving forward. Potentially real hard work specifically because unlike the past, there's not necessarily a generations long historical model for what will work best.
Conversely, it's toward models of idealized slavery and suicide economics where more "utopic" (in a rather dystopian way) visions come with considerable more ease specifically due to the fact that there does exist generations long historical record examples to act as a manual and guide on what to do next.

@Alien (A23P)
You say you were an early advocate of Bitcoin, yet you fail to understand its simplest principles. You repeatedly show links with energy consumption, failing to see why(!) this evolved this way. Because in the beginning Bitcoin worked with only 10 PCs, mining the same block size every 10 minutes.

It is simply that states have no urgence to limit that consumption. Thats is all! It would be easy to find the miners and tax them, yet they don't do it.
Its ONLY a political thing, NOT a technical thing as my link to the Bitcoin difficulty shows.
Even the porn streaming sites need more energy than Bitcoin:
https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2019/09/17/bitcoin-electricity-porn/
Yet some SJW like you scream how bad blockchain is.

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander
First off, not sure why you feel the need to throw the "SJW" label around at all here. It's a distraction from anything real or relevant whatsoever.

Secondly, and as I already noted, while you state that the State is to blame, the fact is, as already noted in one of the links of further detail, it was in fact with complete and full State backing that very observable centralization issues became prevalent with BTC back in 2013. The moment the FBI obtained and re-distributed to a single party 5% of the total BTC volume back in via a single winner take all "auction" was the moment the State/Enterprise/Finance itself might as well had publicly stated "We are fully backing this!"
The rise of the Ethereum Enterprise Member alliance should have made that message all the message all the more clear:
https://entethalliance.org/eea-members/
*some highlights, members include Intel, JP Morgan Chase, Microsoft, ING Bank, FedEx, BBVA, BP, among many others*

So I'm not quite sure how on the one hand you seem to imply "BitCoin is empowering the general public AND NOT squandering resources" while also implicitly saying "The chief actors behind BitCoin are the ones that should be blamed for BitCoin being broken and squandering resources."

To equal end, sitting and citing the amount of energy going toward the Mind Geek (basically monopoly) as some sort of meaningful citation I don't get as it's like saying "The same actor [Elite Finance/Enterprise/State sector] that's squandering resources on BitCoin is also facilitating and pushing squandering of resources on porn...."
If asked, I'd equally say that what has occurred in the Sex Industry, most notably in the rise of the Mind Geek (global) monopoly, is nothing short of total madness!
But I digress, to discuss one isn't to jump all that far from discussing the other as it's arguably little more than speaking of different departments of the same entity as if it's entirely different entities. Which oddly enough, is to negate the nature of modern monetary theory and economics in favor of the exact sort of politician and enterprise corp sector public "newspeak" and "double speak" you commented earlier toward being against!

So Alien, you seem to be upset by the fact that governments and large companies are jumping onboard. To me that looks like a victory instead. There's no way something could be widespread while selectively leaving out certain people. On the other hand, the fact they jumped on gives some stability to bitcoin (support bands on the graphics, I guess) and it simply means it's getting too big to be ignored. People were trading anyways with or without governments approval, so they could as much try to regulate it rather than pretend it doesn't exist.

It's true that governments could tax miners, they don't because miners are a valuable resource. In China, they basically allow China to export energy (and, sadly, coal) without physically moving it across long distances and abroad. Plus, it gives China a huge hashing capacity. This has implications, of course, and I'm sure the Chinese also know.

About the participation problem, internet in general has opened opportunites a bit for everyone. This is not only true for bitcoin. But it's up to the individuals to jump on the right places (IRC and a raspberry pi can take you a long way in learning). You don't need a supercomputer to learn python and ruby, or to inform yourself about bitcoin. It does take a curious mind and a will to learn tho. Bitcoin, like any other open source, is accessible and inclusive, but that doesn't mean someone will come knocking at your door to install it on your machine. You can't blame bitcoin, nor python or IRC if people are too ignorant to even get close to them, if anything you can blame their education system.

Yes 1st world has an implicit advantage on this, but at least this time we are not actively preventing poorer people from being part of it. Counter example: try helping some poor African teenager in getting a MasterCard and then trading shares on some investing platform and see how far you can get. Or, same thing really, try helping them setting up an iOS app development business. Have them pay for the licences and the hardware and you'll see immediately how inclusive all that is. It's not accessible even if you have a curious mind and a will to learn.

Small example: I'm not from a 3rd world Country, but not from a super rich one either. When I was a kid I wanted to learn game programming. There was no internet and everything was locked behind high prices and foreign languages. I wanted a Yaroze at some point and even that (an amazingly open dev kit for its time) was out of reach. I was penalised for being born in a "2nd world" Country in a way (but I know I'm still luckier than most). These days I could've easily obtained a couple raspberry pis and cheap accessories and learned stuff on those, with more learning resources than I could hope to read.

@anonymiss

"you seem to be upset by the fact that governments and large companies are jumping onboard."
- @Michele Santullo

Again, as fore stated, "Be wary of placing blind faith into a centrally controlled abstract (i.e. "money") as applied to a mass for purposes of economics (aka "energy exchange"). Whether or not that central control takes the form of a cult of personality (i.e. politician, priest, celebrity) or institution (central banks, Enterprise market monopolies, "A.I." system[s], etc.) is insignificant to the end (an end that seems little more than at best, "advanced slavery")."

In the case of State and Enterprise actors, this is all the more pertinent as historically THEY DO NOT have the public bests interest in mind. To similar order, close examination on the nature of monetary and economics easily reveals that Blockchain systems ARE NOT of a decentralized nature. If anything, they've proven well for simply obfuscating signal traces to central acting point(s).
As had noted to Mark Obrien (head of EthOS blockchain, among other significant positions in global finance) back in 2018 when he pulled me aside at a particular fintech/blockchain meeting commenting to me that questions I raised during the course of presentations were more pertinent then most and proceeded to question me on what my feelings on were on what what had transpired, to which I answered:
"I see a bunch of people discussing technology they don't understand while pursuing money when they don't even know what money is."
To which he simply grinned.
He further asked where I saw things going, to which I furthered
"Well it seems, that BitCoin is going to break after many have placed faith into it. It seems like Ethereum will largely take the next leading roll. However, there's a seems a very active intent to collapse the public faith in the old institutions of State Government and Enterprise Corporations, and subsequently, this would seem to imply that Ethereum will be demolished some time shortly after BitCoin. Similar things seem to be taking place on Eastern fronts. There will need to be a release valve for those exiting from BitCoin and Ethereum, and seems like that may likely be Tezos (or something like Tezos) on Western fronts and Qtum (or something like Qtum) on Eastern fronts. By the time the next hop from the ICO (2017) days has occurred it seems the system would have become so obfuscated that the ability to at all meaningfully signal trace back to control points and actors of blame would have been fairly thoroughly destroyed."

That was back in 2018.... here we are in 2021 and surprise surprise, Tezos is doing Ethereum wrappers.

Of things said by Mark Obrien as we talked, one thing I'll never forget and pretty sure he wouldn't mind me quoting him on.... regarding the "immutable" nature of blockchains and subsequent increased need of resources to sustain:
"Everything needs to be able to take a shit." -Mark Obrien (EthOS)

So letting go the fact that I see reason to question if there ever truly was a time when the "old order" wasn't actually truly behind the advent of blockchain and cryptocurrencies, I see ZERO reason to trust that the "old order" actors suddenly broke from centuries long history of not having the public best interest in mind, gave up their notions of slave and suicide economics, and suddenly adopted "Be Excellent To Each Other" as their modus operandi. Notably when they very observably continue to show little interest in the pursuit of truth.

So no, I don't see major private Finance, Enterprise, and State adoption as a public best interest good thing as much as I see it as a "reveal" of sorts toward the nature of the space. In it's specific capacity of "reveal", I DO see it as a good thing.

Similarly, I DO see as a good thing that blockchain and cryptocurrency created a potential for a greater social breaking away from the "old order".
I also see as a good thing that open ledgers enabled a means of being able to see and examine how exactly monetary economic systems were working in arguably a much more clear fashion than ever before.
So the FBI seizing 5% of the entire BTC volume (at that 5% proving to have sat in a single location shows whale issues had already emerged prior to the seizure) and moving it to a single NAMED actor (Tim Drapor), zero coin double spending attacks, DAO issues, various price manipulation issues, etc. Such things have in HUGE part the nature of Open Ledgers to thank on such reveals. That's a really good thing. In related fashion, even if specific individuals couldn't always be held to account, things like energies needed to devote to the blockchain space and subsequently being able to signal trace and determine what sort of actors even had the ability to support financing such endeavors has in large part both the nature of Open Ledgers and Open Sourcing to thank. All good and even GREAT things.
However, these lessons aren't worth much of anything if nothing is actionably learned from them.
Again as noted, it's like a bomb was set, but then rather than running away from the bomb, the greater public began being educated and swayed on "How to stop worrying and love the bomb" and are subsequently in rather rapid fashion being brought to hug the bomb.

The hugging of said bomb seems to lead to simply an upgraded nature of slavery and suicide economics and nothing truly new or different at all.

So less one has immediate actionable "free energy" plans to immediately replace resource squandering, less one has resolves for how "A.I." led manipulations are removed from the systems (what a pandoras box that has proven to be), less one has immediate resolves to the numerous known prolific points of underlying security exploit and encryption circumvention....
Be excellent to each other, no fear, DO NOT OBEY,
Progress on from the land of the dead.
#MoneyIsDead

so #ArtHarder

that doesn't mean one isn't free to baallockschain if they want to. I'd just implore to carry some common decency and respect to not impose suck bollocks on everything and everyone else. "Does it scale?" is not the inherent question to impose on an answer ill defined AND "Blockchain!" is not the inherent answer to impose on a question ill defined.

@anonymiss last bit should have read "such" bollocks....
"suck" was unintentional.

I am tired of all this whataboutism

Does #cryptocurrency and climate protection fit together?

Given the energy for calculations uses an expenditure equivalent to that of a country like Switzerland, and serve no real purpose, then no it doesn't.

@frostek@pod.jamidisi-edu.de
No real purpose? Ask Elon Musk, Michael Saylor etc.
Its a hedge against an economic system that can only survive with unnatural growth.
And as long as Mongolia is subsidizing coal power to miners, it is out of reach of Bitcoin.
This level of energy consumption is ONLY a policital topic. It happens only in those countries that give a shit on CO2 emission and environmental protection in general. Why is there no Bitcoin mining in Germany? Go figure out!

@markus@diaspora.flyar.net

Hi Murkas. Whilst the underlying blockchain technology is both interesting and beneficial for a variety of applications, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are not going to be around in their current form in the non short-term future. It's a prototype system at best and whatever replaces it will not enrich the people who bought into the current system. They'll be left with some worthless numbers. The majority of the people who were big players in there will simply bail out ahead of the little people.

This level of energy consumption is ONLY a policital topic.

Er... what? That's the global total. It's a currency that has no actual backing except a few people just saying that it has worth. but it's basically a re-run of Tulip mania.

It happens only in those countries that give a shit on CO2 emission and environmental protection in general.

So, countries which aren't sh*t, basically.

Why is there no Bitcoin mining in Germany?

You could have literally Googled your own words.

https://www.scmp.com/news/world/europe/article/3120852/german-who-mined-68-million-bitcoin-others-computers-and-was

@frostek@pod.jamidisi-edu.de

So, countries which aren’t sh*t, basically.

China, Venezuela and Iran are countries with high standards regarding CO2 emission? You must be joking.

So, countries which aren’t sh*t, basically.

Please do your homework properly.
While that guy is a german, his victims are not, and thats not a mining farm.
Please spend at least more than one google search to find out why actually in Germany there is no Bitcoin farm.

@anonymiss @Murkas Wylander you just said to ask the guy (Elon Musk) that runs a company (Tesla) that's never had a positive P:E (price to earnings ratio).....
For the layman, what that means is that the Tesla company, to date, DOES NOT actually turn a profit and has been perpetually running at a loss.
In essence, the guy is largely funded on QE (Quantitative Easing) and otherwise free money dished out to him to the tune of billions from the Finance/Enterprise/State sector. Such "welfare" actions have now put his "on the books" wealth above the GDP of multiple countries.
Just thought I'd point out, that once again your pointer is toward spokes persons/frontmen for a system that have clearly shown not at all interested in acting in any sort of regard to public best interest or honesty.

Secondly, even alleging there's ZERO BitCoin mining in Germany (which is a pretty huge allegation) is problematic in as much that it inherently points toward centralization issues rising in the BitCoin blockchain space and an inability for the greater general public to participate in ensuring blockchain authenticity and security against 51% attacks by powerful adversary (among else). At that, it does so basically under an inherent basis of the resource consumption power costs being too high for the general person to afford.

There's really not much point to acting like the resource consumption based power issue doesn't exist as it's a well established known in the space itself and one can find it discussed all over the place pretty openly. So rather than putting up a defense that the space itself in it's mainstream doesn't even attempt to defend, perhaps re-frame the discussion point:
What is it you feel blockchain (basically just a database) enables that isn't otherwise possible but necessary?
What is it that you feel cryptocurrencies enable that isn't otherwise possible but necessary?

But nevertheless Gamestop shows us institutional investers can be fought back.

Let's see how long it is before this is weaponised by various hostile governments to further undermine other countries.

@anonymiss @Stephen Tayor to act as if it hadn't already been well weaponized by NUMEROUS arms of "powerful adversary" is to presume total and under incompetence on the part of the ICs (intelligence communities)

Let’s see how long it is before this is weaponised by various hostile governments to further undermine other countries.

"Hostile Governments" whatever that means...
But actually Bitcoin is used by Venezuela to bypass embargos of the US:
(link unfortunately in German):
https://bitcoinblog.de/2020/12/15/venezuela-benutzt-angeblich-bitcoins-um-geld-in-die-turkei-und-den-iran-zu-senden/