Bitcoin Stands as a Potential Environmental Nightmare for Countering Global Warming - Sensationalist Headlines

Bitcoin is the start of the Vex!

[QUOTE]the aggregate computing power of the bitcoin network is nearly 100,000 times larger than the world’s 500 fastest supercomputers combined.[/QUOTE] You can't just compare a network of ASICs built to do just a single thing to the more general-purpose supercomputers, how did they even get that number?. Nobody is going to going to cure ${disease} running SHA256 twice on some data. [QUOTE]In Venezuela, where rampant hyperinflation and subsidized electricity has led to a boom in bitcoin mining, rogue operations are now occasionally [B]causing[/B] blackouts across the country.[/QUOTE] It seems to me that overworking our two working hamster wheels and then subsidizing the resulting power, never bothering to upgrade the capacity of the grid is the sole reason there are blackouts at all regardless of what use is give to the energy. [QUOTE]One enterprising Tesla owner even [B]attempted[/B] to rig up a mining operation in his car, to make use of free electricity at a public charging station.[/QUOTE] I'm not surprised that a single guy in the entire planet tried to do something selfish to the detriment to others. Article tl;dr: The article wants to paint bitcoin as a terrible evil that will kill us all because countries could choose to use dirty power sources. My opinion tl;dr: You shouldn't tell anyone what to do with the energy they pay for. If consumption is a problem, don't increase price just linearly along with consumption.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52953745]My opinion tl;dr: You shouldn't tell anyone what to do with the energy they pay for. If consumption is a problem, don't increase price just linearly along with consumption.[/QUOTE] So people shouldn't be blamed for their use of energy as long as they manage to turn a profit from it? Did you sell your moral compass to make a quick buck? Economics don't absolve you from your responsibilities regarding the consequences of your actions.

[QUOTE=Snickerdoodle;52952969]I'm curious how much actual environmental impact when you adjust for the fact that a bitcoin mining rig just kind of adds to your household heating. I mean, watt for watt, your PC is just a smart heater. If I want my house to stay at 70 degrees in the winter and I have a bitcoin miner and heater going, the heater is going to be working slightly less than it would without the miner because the miner is generating heat as well. At least for household setups like this in winter, I think it equalizes out.[/QUOTE] The days of most mining happening in peoples homes are over. [url]https://www.google.de/search?safe=off&ei=AQIpWsjaNdLAkgX5r6HIBA&q=inside+bitcoin+mine+&oq=inside+bitcoin+mine+&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i19k1j0i22i30i19k1l6.10016.10016.0.10247.1.1.0.0.0.0.61.61.1.1.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.1.59....0.rZ__HdBURoA[/url]

[QUOTE=Kecske;52952648][img]https://powercompare.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/bitcoin-mining-vs-world.png[/img] Who would win? My decently industrialized country with 9 million people or one decentralized boi[/QUOTE] Vatican City uses that much electricity? :thinking:

[QUOTE=_Axel;52953817]So people shouldn't be blamed for their use of energy as long as they manage to turn a profit from it? Did you sell your moral compass to make a quick buck? Economics don't absolve you from your responsibilities regarding the consequences of your actions.[/QUOTE] The part you quote literally means charge people running energy-intensive operations more than say someone just running a lightbulb to the point where it becomes unprofitable if they use up too much. Don't see the part that makes me a hardcore capitalist there.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52953853]The part you quote literally means charge people running energy-intensive operations more than say someone just running a lightbulb to the point where it becomes unprofitable if they use up too much. Don't see the part that makes me a hardcore capitalist there.[/QUOTE] The part I quoted said "You shouldn't tell anyone what they should do with the energy they pay for" which is simply wrong. People [I]should[/I] be called out for using energy irresponsibly.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52953867]The part I quoted said "You shouldn't tell anyone what they should do with the energy they pay for" which is simply wrong. People [I]should[/I] be called out for using energy irresponsibly.[/QUOTE] Huge power bills are a very effective deterrent, besides, what do you call irresponsible?.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52953886]Huge power bills are a very effective deterrent, besides, what do you call irresponsible?.[/QUOTE] Because I always explain why I rate someone dumb (though in this case it should be obvious): You're being either intentionally obtuse or you're not understanding basic interaction. Having a problem with people using energy wastefully (for the planet and humanity as a whole, not for themselves) and making that public/complaining about them and billing them more are not mutually exclusive in the first place, so don't pretend they are. Additionally, large consumers with steady power requirements are normally in a much better bargaining position than average customers, so it's not very realistic that they'll be charged more without doing so indirectly through taxing coin mining.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52953886]Huge power bills are a very effective deterrent[/QUOTE] I don't give a shit about deterrents, an absence of deterrent doesn't justify an absence of morals. If you waste huge amounts of energy to achieve nothing of actual use, you're a cunt, end of. Besides, how is your "solution" even supposed to work? You plan to increase exponentially the bill of individual consumers based on their consumption? How is it fair at all that a family of four who do all they can to save up on energy pay exponentially more than a single person who doesn't give a shit and wastes tons of energy? What about industries, what price should they pay considering they spend huge amounts of energy to actually produce something? Is it logical at all that if a bitcoin farm divides into two entities they suddenly pay a whole lot less as a whole while still paying dividends to the same people? [QUOTE]besides, what do you call irresponsible?.[/QUOTE] I don't know, chugging down insane amounts of power to make money off something that doesn't create any form of actual value?

[QUOTE=Tamschi;52953904]Because I always explain why I rate someone dumb[/QUOTE] Thank you. [QUOTE](though in this case it should be obvious)[/QUOTE] Besides things like breathing and eating i don't think there's such a thing as obvious. Don't just assume everything you know is obvious. [QUOTE]You're being either intentionally obtuse or you're not understanding basic interaction.[/QUOTE] For context i'm a venezuelan that only knows enough english to be dangerous (to himself), which can cause issues in understanding both ways in a conversation. [QUOTE]Having a problem with people using energy wastefully (for the planet and humanity as a whole, not for themselves) and making that public/complaining about them and billing them more are not mutually exclusive in the first place, so don't pretend they are. Additionally, large consumers with steady power requirements are normally in a much better bargaining position than average customers, so it's not very realistic that they'll be c harged more without doing so indirectly through taxing coin mining.[/QUOTE] Who gets to decide what is wasteful?. Because morality is subjective, it sounds absurd to me to go and raid homes of people that have 1 too many computers, or hell, people that play videogames because they're computing something that they throw away 60 times a second. Bitcoin by itself is not harmful for the planet even if useless for first world countries with a working (more or less) currency. The big issue is not the mining but the dirty energy sources being used. I think that it's better to push for clean energy than for a bitcoin ban/regulation (how do you tax bitcoin?). _Axel's posts just come off to me as "I hate bitcoin and fuck you if you don't hate it like i do" (I don't even have a completely favorable opinion of bitcoin, and would prefer a working traditional currency that uses less energy).

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52953959]Thank you. Besides things like breathing and eating i don't think there's such a thing as obvious. Don't just assume everything you know is obvious. For context i'm a venezuelan that only knows enough english to be dangerous (to himself), which can cause issues in understanding both ways in a conversation. Who gets to decide what is wasteful?. Because morality is subjective, it sounds absurd to me to go and raid homes of people that have 1 too many computers, or hell, people that play videogames because they're computing something that they throw away 60 times a second. Bitcoin by itself is not harmful for the planet even if useless for first world countries with a working (more or less) currency. The big issue is not the mining but the dirty energy sources being used. I think that it's better to push for clean energy than for a bitcoin ban/regulation (how do you tax bitcoin?). _Axel's posts just come off to me as "I hate bitcoin and fuck you if you don't hate it like i do" (I don't even have a completely favorable opinion of bitcoin, and would prefer a working traditional currency that uses less energy).[/QUOTE] Could you stop arguing semantics/principles with the usual "who decides what is" tactic and just admit that bitcoin mining is fucking wasteful in the current form? Not in some supposed future form, in the current, existing form.

[QUOTE=Killuah;52954071]Could you [B]stop arguing semantics/principles[/B] with [B]the usual[/B] "who decides what is" tactic and [B]just admit[/B] that bitcoin mining is fucking wasteful in the current form? Not in some supposed future form, in the current, existing form.[/QUOTE] Sorry, I read again and again these posts and the intention behind them all just seem to be, once again "Fuck you, i'm right", dismissing everything and coming up with a reply that looks intended more to "win" the argument than actually care at all about what i said, why bother writing a reply so empty, isn't that wasteful of time and energy?. Don't take this personal, i just won't agree with you just because you said that something was so. Wastefulness isn't binary, and just because there's no use for you doesn't mean that there isn't any use for anyone ever, I don't know if the usefulness of bitcoin is worth the energy, i'd be indifferent if bitcoin just failed tomorrow, plain old money will still exist and still do a decent job where bitcoin (specifically bitcoin) excels. Never said anything about a future form for but for places where the energy is solar, wind, or (not as harmlessly) nuclear you can waste it all you want and it's not harmful like mining in a place that uses coal. Where there could be restrictions and i wouldn't defend mining happening there.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52954113]Sorry, I read again and again these posts and the intention behind them all just seem to be, once again "Fuck you, i'm right", dismissing everything and coming up with a reply that looks intended more to "win" the argument than actually care at all about what i said, why bother writing a reply so empty, isn't that wasteful of time and energy?. Don't take this personal, i just won't agree with you just because you said that something was so. Wastefulness isn't binary, and just because there's no use for you doesn't mean that there isn't any use for anyone ever, I don't know if the usefulness of bitcoin is worth the energy, i'd be indifferent if bitcoin just failed tomorrow, plain old money will still exist and still do a decent job where bitcoin (specifically bitcoin) excels. Never said anything about a future form for but for places where the energy is solar, wind, or (not as harmlessly) nuclear you can waste it all you want and it's not harmful like mining in a place that uses coal. Where there could be restrictions and i wouldn't defend mining happening there.[/QUOTE] [I]Countries that don't use fossil fuels to generate at least part of their electricity don't exist, and the vast majority use it as their primary source of energy production.[/I] By mining, you siphon ludicrous amounts of energy from the grid 24/7 for no purpose other than entertain the ongoing speculative bubble, which necessarily increases the demand and thus increases the amount of fossil fuel plants in activity. It's never harmless. We've been explaining to you why this is harmful for a few posts now but you keep on insisting we're writing "empty" replies. How about you try to actually read them instead of going "Fuck you, I'm right"?

[QUOTE=_Axel;52954130] We've been explaining to you why this is harmful for a few posts now but you keep on insisting we're writing "empty" replies. How about you try to actually read them instead of going "Fuck you, I'm right"?[/QUOTE] Telling me i got no morals for not completely rejecting bitcoin is not explaining a thing, it's just empty angry writting, which i've tried and think have not done in this thread. [QUOTE][I]Countries that don't use fossil fuels to generate at least part of their electricity don't exist, and the vast majority use it as their primary source of energy production.[/I] By mining, you siphon ludicrous amounts of energy from the grid 24/7 for no purpose other than entertain the ongoing speculative bubble, which necessarily increases the demand and thus increases the amount of fossil fuel plants in activity. It's never harmless.[/QUOTE] What i got from your posts is that simply, there's no reason at all for bitcoin to exist, and it should be banned from earth because it doesn't fit your idea of 'useful' bitcoin IS useful at the moment as a way of paying for things across the internet, you can exchange it for other currencies too. I think the best bitcoin can do with regards to using electricity responsibly, regardless of who finds it useful or not is to at most use enough energy so that no country has the most hashrate attack and move towards using renewables. The miners don't care if you think they're wasting electricity but if you incentivise renewable energy and penalize using dirty energy it's a much better thing to do than just trying to make it dissapear. I don't believe that the consumption can just grow inifinitely and if it does cap then, it's just a matter of upgrading the grids and mining buildings with renewables and there's no issue with it anymore, but maybe i'm being too 'optimistic' and pragmatically about the issue. Venezuela itself generates more than half of it's energy renewably with the 2 hamsters left after they let the other 8 starve, if the self-described socialist government didn't happen that number could have been closer to 100% with the use of nuclear energy. (It may still happen after everyone lets this place become another NK and they come up with it as an excuse to build weapons)

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52954211]Telling me i got no morals for not completely rejecting bitcoin is not explaining a thing, it's just empty angry writting, which i've tried and think have not done in this thread.[/QUOTE] What I told you is that you have to be disconnected from morality to make such a statement as "You shouldn't tell anyone what to do with the energy they pay for". Energy consumption has a real impact on everyone else, and it needs to be used responsibly. [QUOTE]What i got from your posts is that simply, there's no reason at all for bitcoin to exist, and it should be banned from earth because it doesn't fit your idea of 'useful' bitcoin IS useful at the moment as a way of paying for things across the internet, you can exchange it for other currencies too.[/QUOTE] You know what Paypal is, right? I don't see them wasting tons of energy on crunching useless numbers. Bitcoin is not suited for transactions currently, Steam even dropped it recently because of the associated constraints. At present, those who mine are doing so solely for their own enrichment and contribute nothing to society. [QUOTE]I think the best bitcoin can do with regards to using electricity responsibly, regardless of who finds it useful or not is to at most use enough energy so that no country has the most hashrate attack and move towards using renewables. The miners don't care if you think they're wasting electricity but if you incentivise renewable energy and penalize using dirty energy it's a much better thing to do than just trying to make it dissapear.[/QUOTE] No it's not. The urgency of global warming and upcoming environmental disasters doesn't simply mean that we should come up with new, low-impact ways of producing energy, it also means that [I]we should change our way of life and optimize consumption so that we need as little of that energy as possible in the first place.[/I] That's why we try to build thermally efficient buildings and optimize industrial processes. You're okay with letting all of those people's hard work go to waste because some fuckers want to hop in on the cryptocurrency trend? Because as an engineer who does work on those issues, I'm definitely not. Is Bitcoin mining useful to us? It doesn't serve any purpose currently and is certainly not useful enough to warrant such obscene consumption. If we have to do away with turning the heat all the way up when it's freezing outside and have to wear a sweater instead, then this brand of mining should definitely fuck off as well. As for your suggestion that we just put renewables on top of mining buildings to make it all alright, it's misguided. Solar and wind are intermittent, and unless we come up with a viable energy storage solution crazy fast those mining farms will still pull on the grid when renewables are down, and that means more CO2 up the atmosphere. That's assuming you can fully power a multi-story farm using local sources as well, which I'm not certain is possible. [QUOTE]I don't believe that the consumption can just grow inifinitely and if it does cap then, it's just a matter of upgrading the grids and mining buildings with renewables and there's no issue with it anymore, but maybe i'm being too 'optimistic' and pragmatically about the issue.[/QUOTE] It's already a tough enough challenge having to balance energy grids with the increasing share of renewables without having to deal with the additional strain of mining. Saying that claiming "we just have to upgrade the grid and slap some PV panels on it" is optimistic is an understatement. [editline]7th December 2017[/editline] (Solar panel production also emits CO2 by the way)

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52954211]Telling me [B]i got no morals for not completely rejecting bitcoin[/B] is not explaining a thing, it's just empty angry writting, which i've tried and think have not done in this thread. [/QUOTE] Where?

[QUOTE=Killuah;52954309]Where?[/QUOTE] Not really your posts but Axel's, only mentioned anything about that because it's hard to see what they're saying when it's so deep in crap it takes ages to get the actual meaning. It doesn't really matter anyways. [QUOTE=_Axel;52954287]What I told you is that you have to be disconnected from morality to make such a statement as "You shouldn't tell anyone what to do with the energy they pay for". Energy consumption has a real impact on everyone else, and it needs to be used responsibly.[/Quote] I'd agree with you if you said reality and not morality. Morality implies that I don't give a crap about people. [QUOTE]You know what Paypal is, right? I don't see them wasting tons of energy on crunching useless numbers.[/QUOTE] I don't really know if i should be more scared of paypal randomly closing my account or bitcoin randomly dropping in price, thankfully i'm too poor and have no currency at all in either (lies, about .0000somethign from ages ago when i tested it and it worked fine). This is one of the things i care about, not about bitcoin itself but the freedom it creates, paypal is simply not as good as cryptocurrencies (while stable). [QUOTE] Bitcoin is not suited for transactions currently, Steam even dropped it recently because of the associated constraints[/QUOTE] Well shit. [QUOTE]No it's not. The urgency of global warming and upcoming environmental disasters doesn't simply mean that we should come up with new, low-impact ways of producing energy, it also means that [I]we should change our way of life and optimize consumption so that we need as little of that energy as possible in the first place.[/I] That's why we try to build thermally efficient buildings and optimize industrial processes. You're okay with letting all of those people's hard work go to waste because some fuckers want to hop in on the cryptocurrency trend? Because as an engineer who does work on those issues, I'm definitely not. Is Bitcoin mining useful to us? It doesn't serve any purpose currently and is certainly not useful enough to warrant such obscene consumption. If we have to do away with turning the heat all the way up when it's freezing outside and have to wear a sweater instead, then this brand of mining should definitely fuck off as well. As for your suggestion that we just put renewables on top of mining buildings to make it all alright, it's misguided. Solar and wind are intermittent, and unless we come up with a viable energy storage solution crazy fast those mining farms will still pull on the grid when renewables are down, and that means more CO2 up the atmosphere. That's assuming you can fully power a multi-story farm using local sources as well, which I'm not certain is possible. It's already a tough enough challenge having to balance energy grids with the increasing share of renewables without having to deal with the additional strain of mining. Saying that claiming "we just have to upgrade the grid and slap some PV panels on it" is optimistic is an understatement. (Solar panel production also emits CO2 by the way)[/QUOTE] If it's absolutely impossible to improve crypto in a way that the concerns stop then it is pragmatic to stop using it. I don't like the idea of forcing people to people to do things unless absolutely necessary which is something governments [I]love[/I] to do.

But he didn't say you have no morals for completely rejecting Bitcoin either. You seem to react kind of strong to this and I am curious why.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;52954576]Not really your posts but Axel's, only mentioned anything about that because it's hard to see what they're saying when it's so deep in crap it takes ages to get the actual meaning. It doesn't really matter anyways.[/quote] Crap? I make the effort to explain how stuff works to you and you don't even bother reading it, then proceed to call it fucking crap. Just because English isn't your main language doesn't give you an excuse to gloss over posts and call them shit without understanding them. [Quote]I'd agree with you if you said reality and not morality. Morality implies that I don't give a crap about people.[/quote] "You shouldn't do X" is a moral statement. Saying people shouldn't be criticized for the way they use energy is a shitty moral statement. [Quote]I don't really know if i should be more scared of paypal randomly closing my account or bitcoin randomly dropping in price, thankfully i'm too poor and have no currency at all in either (lies, about .0000somethign from ages ago when i tested it and it worked fine).[/quote] You don't have to store money on your Paypal account to spend it on the internet. You can just link it to your credit card or bank account. Unless you live in Venezuela, Zimbabwe or another country with unstable currency, I don't see the point in storing your money as internet funbux. And 99% of the case people who use Bitcoins aren't from those countries. [Quote]If it's absolutely impossible to improve crypto in a way that the concerns stop then it is pragmatic to stop using it.[/quote] That's the thing with crypto. The value of a cryptocoin depends on how hard it is to mine it. Reduce the processing power (and thuu required to mine one and it's value will eventually compensate for it. And even without that, if someone finds a way to optimize mining why would they use less processing power rather than earn more money? [Quote]I don't like the idea of forcing people to people to do things unless absolutely necessary which is something governments [I]love[/I] to do.[/QUOTE] Look, just because your government is utter shit doesn't mean that's the case for every country. Proper regulation by governments is not simply possible, it's necessary.

[QUOTE=Killuah;52954974]But he didn't say you have no morals for completely rejecting Bitcoin either. You seem to react kind of strong to this and I am curious why.[/QUOTE] Not so much a strong reaction as it is that I don't want to be either perceived wrongly or having a wrong opinion myself (assuming you refer to the long-ish posts, which i prefer typing when I have the time and energy, original post was written at 6:00 AM means it had the least effort) the posts also being some good exercising of my rusty english which i barely get to use since nobody around speaks it. I didn't initially pay much attention to the thread, my first post being nitpicking and only giving the thread a longer thought after tamski's post. Axel's wording made it really hard to understand the reasoning behind his posts and initially I just thought he was just a bitter guy without a reasoning yelling about bitcoin using power consumption as an excuse to act superior or whatever, it's a pattern i've seen in posters about every topic but i may just be seeing something where there's nothing: [QUOTE] Did you sell your moral compass to make a quick buck? I don't give a shit about deterrents, an absence of deterrent doesn't justify an absence of morals. If you waste huge amounts of energy to achieve nothing of actual use, you're a cunt, end of. Could you stop arguing semantics/principles with the usual "who decides what is" tactic and just admit that bitcoin mining is fucking wasteful in the current form? Not in some supposed future form, in the current, existing form. (Don't see where i said that last part) You're okay with letting all of those people's hard work go to waste. [/QUOTE] This is what i called crap, empty, because it contributes nothing and actually distracts from what he's trying to say, could only do worse by turning on allcaps. Some things i didn't reply to because i have to choose what seems more important because i can't write a long post and not expect people to go tl;dr, doesn't mean i totally skipped over it and didn't think about it these past hours, would have replied if asked again: [QUOTE] You plan to increase exponentially the bill of individual consumers based on their consumption? How is it fair at all that a family of four who do all they can to save up on energy pay exponentially more than a single person who doesn't give a shit and wastes tons of energy? What about industries, what price should they pay considering they spend huge amounts of energy to actually produce something? Is it logical at all that if a bitcoin farm divides into two entities they suddenly pay a whole lot less as a whole while still paying dividends to the same people? (Linear up to a certain point, gets really expensive when it gets to the point where nobody will be using that much electricity, circumventing gets you in trouble) [I]Countries that don't use fossil fuels to generate at least part of their electricity don't exist, and the vast majority use it as their primary source of energy production.[/I] By mining, you siphon ludicrous amounts of energy from the grid 24/7 for no purpose other than entertain the ongoing speculative bubble, which necessarily increases the demand and thus increases the amount of fossil fuel plants in activity. It's never harmless. (I did reply to this by suggesting renewables, to which he replied later) Is Bitcoin mining useful to us? It doesn't serve any purpose currently(With the steam thing and the 20$ per transaction, no it isn't useful but i wouldn't dismiss crypto entirely, but the consumption becomes more concerning the more i think about it) [/QUOTE] I found myself agreeing more with his later posts where he provided some context and better explanations: [QUOTE] engineer who does work on those issues The urgency of global warming and upcoming environmental disasters doesn't simply mean that we should come up with new, low-impact ways of producing energy, it also means that [I]we should change our way of life and optimize consumption so that we need as little of that energy as possible in the first place.[/I] As for your suggestion that we just put renewables on top of mining buildings to make it all alright, it's misguided. Solar and wind are intermittent, and unless we come up with a viable energy storage solution crazy fast those mining farms will still pull on the grid when renewables are down, and that means more CO2 up the atmosphere. That's assuming you can fully power a multi-story farm using local sources as well, which I'm not certain is possible. It's already a tough enough challenge having to balance energy grids with the increasing share of renewables without having to deal with the additional strain of mining. Saying that claiming "we just have to upgrade the grid and slap some PV panels on it" is optimistic is an understatement. [editline]7th December 2017[/editline] (Solar panel production also emits CO2 by the way) [/QUOTE] - [QUOTE=_Axel;52954988]Crap? I make the effort to explain how stuff works to you and you don't even bother reading it, then proceed to call it fucking crap. Just because English isn't your main language doesn't give you an excuse to gloss over posts and call them shit without understanding them. "You shouldn't do X" is a moral statement. Saying people shouldn't be criticized for the way they use energy is a shitty moral statement.[/QUOTE] Wrote about some of that above. Didn't call shit the entire posts. Disagree with actions to take about mining. You call for explicit banning(or so I think), I said it's probably better to make them behave by adjusting prices. One bans, the other allows but limits for the belief that there's some usefulness to it(arguably not anymore?). [QUOTE]That's the thing with crypto. The value of a cryptocoin depends on how hard it is to mine it. Reduce the processing power (and thuu required to mine one and it's value will eventually compensate for it. And even without that, if someone finds a way to optimize mining why would they use less processing power rather than earn more money?[/QUOTE] Not all crypto is necessarily proof-of-work (this is a nitpick barely worth typing?).

I mean, we're going to hit the very same issue with beginning AI. The server farms alone for something like that would require huge amounts of data and information to be pumped through massive server farms. This also fails to take into account the amount of real-estate needed for not only the server farms but also the needed space for power plants. All these methods have to still deal with the significant impact that they convey. For instance, wind turbines? Because of the massive blades and the difference in air pressure they create, they absolutely slaughter bats. Their lungs implode from the inside out because their blood vessels can't deal with the sudden change in air pressure. There were several studies done looking into birds, only to find bat corpses everywhere. Solar on the other hand, when its not covered on rooftops of houses and businesses, requires massive amounts of real estate to power. Hydro causes severe warming to waterways which fucks over fish. Nuclear creates deadly waste that we can store away but must do so carefully. Bitcoin, and technologies like it that require massive inefficient server farms constantly churning away for an boom/bust based currency with zero value in the grander scheme of things, are a massive liability on both the planet, our economies, our safety and our futures.

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;52955540]I mean, we're going to hit the very same issue with beginning AI. [/QUOTE] I know it's not the main point of your argument, but that's not true as far as AI is concerned. The training data needed is huge, yes, but disk is very cheap and very dense, and doesn't consume nearly as much power as GPUs do. Actual power used by AI is trivial, especially compared to Bitcoin, and drastically decreasing with time. The initial AlphaGo training hardware in 2016 used 48 Machine learning ASICs on a distributed system. Currently, it performs better than it did in 2016 on a single machine with only 4 machine learning ASICs.

[QUOTE=Harbie;52955575]I know it's not the main point of your argument, but that's not true as far as AI is concerned. The training data needed is huge, yes, but disk is very cheap and very dense, and doesn't consume nearly as much power as GPUs do. Actual power used by AI is trivial, especially compared to Bitcoin, and drastically decreasing with time. The initial AlphaGo training hardware in 2016 used 48 Machine learning ASICs on a distributed system. Currently, it performs better than it did in 2016 on a single machine with only 4 machine learning ASICs.[/QUOTE] Oh fair then! I had assumed they still needed server farms to deal with the massive amounts of data. [editline]7th December 2017[/editline] Especially with things like Watson combing through millions of research papers and the like.

[QUOTE=just-a-boy;52952981]Crypto miners living in cold regions actually save on costs this way. Their rigs just heat up their homes all year round.[/QUOTE] I don't live in a cold place, but we have a Dell plant here with a lot of very large servers that use the heat generated from the servers to warm the building during the winter. I've always found that kind of stuff fascinating.

I doubt the value can be taken much further beyond its current, ludicrously inflated, value. Transaction fees are at fucking $20 and it's [i]still going up[/i], even though it can barely be used for its intended purpose right now; it seems the exchange rate is almost entirely based off hype rather than actual real-world value (which it clearly also has, but not [i]that[/i] much).

good luck telling the neckbeards to give up their libertarian meme coins. they'll just decide that climate change is a sjw scam

[QUOTE=FlakTheMighty;52956117]I don't live in a cold place, but we have a Dell plant here with a lot of very large servers that use the heat generated from the servers to warm the building during the winter. I've always found that kind of stuff fascinating.[/QUOTE] Yeah but most farming is done in China in some remote location with subsidized power

[QUOTE=_Axel;52954287](Solar panel production also emits CO2 by the way)[/QUOTE] Just FYI, the CO2 emission in solar panel production is because you have to melt silicon in electric furnaces. If those electric furnaces are run by coal or something, yes, there's gonna be a lot of CO2 emissions. Nuclear(and cleaner)? Not so much.

[QUOTE=Str4fe;52958323]Just FYI, the CO2 emission in solar panel production is because you have to melt silicon in electric furnaces. If those electric furnaces are run by coal or something, yes, there's gonna be a lot of CO2 emissions. Nuclear(and cleaner)? Not so much.[/QUOTE] Increase the efficiency, melt the silicon directly using the heat generated from a nuclear reactor.