New York looks to ban cryptomining to study environmental impacts

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZackL04

Posts: 738   +564
:rolleyes: Because no fossil fuel consuming vehicle pollutes? Not to mention all the other inefficiencies, and there are many should you decide to research it, instead of getting your "information" from Fix News and the fossil fuel industry shills. Got it!

One thing many in the younger generation seems unable/unlikely to do is think for themselves.
I never said electric vehicles were worse than combustion engines. I was comparing the governments worry of mining electricity vs them ignoring electricity used by an EV vehicle.
 

NightAntilli

Posts: 761   +962
But the United States is a superpower with power in so many places around the world.
So was Rome. Well, technically Europe instead of the world, but, the same concept applies. The largest superpower always collapses in light of their... Let's call it overconfidence.

One must not forget that every monetary system is an experiment. None have been successful. The best we have right now, is crypto.

Besides, if the US economy fails the whole world is going to go with it and then what?
Another currency will take its place. And despite the word "China" being taboo in these forums, it will either be their currency, or a decentralized crypto. I'm hoping for the latter, but I'm afraid it might be the former.

You can have all the crypto you want but you're going to be in the same d**m boat with the rest of us poor bastards. Don't kid yourself dude, you're going to be just as screwed as the rest of us are.
Not just as screwed. Everyone will get screwed, but, hard assets will ultimately retain their value, no matter what they are expressed in. Having hard assets will at least make your own survival and recovery a lot better, faster and less difficult.

In case of a global collapse, what would you rather have at home? An ounce of Gold, or twenty $100 bills? I guess if you just had some digestion issues, the latter might be preferred.

The thing no ones explained to me. During the collapse crypto is trying to defend again how will you access your funds when the lights go out?
Why would the lights go out globally? There's renewable energy all over the place, and, there's Starlink for internet.

Or we can go cosmic; what happens when the sun spits out CME and fries all systems that hold the blockchain records? Is the blockchain EMP hardened?
Good question. If we have to say goodbye to the internet and computers, we have to most likely say goodbye to crypto, at least in the short term. But the same applies to anything stored on a computer everywhere, which includes money on banks, your stock holdings etc. And those are not likely to be recovered. The blockchain, since there are so many copies, is more likely to still exist and be revived down the line.

The one advantage to fiat is it's a tangible realworld object I obtain as reward to contributing to society. If bitcoin starts issuing physical tangible non-digital currency I can keep under a pillow I'll start taking it a bit more seriously.
It's not really a tangible real world object, although there are indeed representations of it. The majority of fiat is still on computers. And with covid, that physical object seems close to being phased out as well.

If you want your Bitcoin under a pillow, buy a hardware wallet lol. Just know that you would not be able to send them without a connection, but you could still receive your payments (those will update after you reconnect).

It would also be interesting to see where the wealth distribution of bitcoin lies. Say US citizens have 20%, China 40%,etc. That's pretty terrible financial leverage in my eyes. Say the larger stake holders decide to kick the floor out from under you.

I'm neither for or against; just rambling.
 

gamerk2

Posts: 585   +506
Is this true for archival media like M-discs? Those are designed for long-term storage and have no processors; it's just 1s and 0s engraved directly into a durable medium with a high-powered laser.
Something that's engraved would certainly last much longer, but remember there's a LOT of physical debris in space; sooner or later something is going to hit it that makes it unreadable. But it would be more or less immune to radiation damage (so long as the actual surface didn't degrade due to radiation/reactions; really not sure on all the physics involved there.)
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
These are all very good questions!

During a serious collapse, yes, it will be difficult to access the blockchain. However, the decentralized nature of Bitcoin and other cryptos are going to allow it to get back on its feet much more quickly than other systems which are more centralized. A laptop running a Bitcoin node can be powered by a few solar panels; the server farms that Bank of America needs to operate, not so much. So yes, during the event, we'll all be in trouble, but during the recovery, crypto is going to continue to shine.
That crypto is going to continue to shine is a pretty broad statement of which there is no certainty.
Who is to say that in an event of the magnitude you are suggesting, anyone is going to actually have solar panels to power any computer, and is going to be primarily concerned with keeping a block chain living instead of themselves? What incentive is there for them to keep the block chain alive?

Previously, copies of the blockchain have actually been launched into space, or stored on media that is not sensitive to solar activity, so legacy blockchain data is secured as well.
That it has been launched into space is no guarantee that anyone will want to expend any resources to recover it.

As for wealth concentration, it's complicated. But right now the number of "whales" is increasing, which hints at Bitcoin wealth becoming less concentrated in the hands of few over time more broadly:

And that may also hint that no one single person who has an interest, or even a group of people who have interests in bitcoin will be able to keep it alive in the event of some unforeseen disaster.
Your post brought it up. But thanks for admitting by default that you have no response to the point I made.
Why did you not read the article I linked. Just because you did not want to see a reliable post on the subject?
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
I never said electric vehicles were worse than combustion engines. I was comparing the governments worry of mining electricity vs them ignoring electricity used by an EV vehicle.
No where in this article is it even implied that governments are ignoring the electricity use of EVs, is it?

At this point, with the push toward EVs and government incentives, in the US at least, it almost goes without saying that governments are concerned with the amount of electricity EVs use; more specifically, they are interested in the benefits of moving to EVs from fossil-fueled vehicles, I.e., less pollution, and by some estimates, significantly less pollution.

However, as I see it, crypto has not lived up to its promise; in fact, it has done just the opposite at least, in part, by helping criminal elements in their endeavors.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 981   +1,419
That crypto is going to continue to shine is a pretty broad statement of which there is no certainty.
Who is to say that in an event of the magnitude you are suggesting, anyone is going to actually have solar panels to power any computer, and is going to be primarily concerned with keeping a block chain living instead of themselves? What incentive is there for them to keep the block chain alive?
Well, drawing from history, there was no clear incentive for medieval European monks to copy works of antiquity down for preservation either during the Middle Ages following the collapse of Rome; regardless, they did. For crypto enthusiasts, the incentive is direct - to preserve the value they've saved once the world recovers, if not for themselves, then for their next of kin. They're going to be a lot more motivated, at any rate, than former Bank of America clerks or IRS agents are going to be.

That it has been launched into space is no guarantee that anyone will want to expend any resources to recover it.
They don't need to bring it back to Earth, they just need to connect to it:


And that may also hint that no one single person who has an interest, or even a group of people who have interests in bitcoin will be able to keep it alive in the event of some unforeseen disaster.

Why did you not read the article I linked. Just because you did not want to see a reliable post on the subject?
Call it a lingering distrust of academia, ever since it started attacking open source.

 

NightAntilli

Posts: 761   +962
I'm baking in yearly wage increases. The *average* increase in wages is historically (and recently) been higher then inflation, making this point moot.
Historical average, yes. I REALLY doubt that's the case recently though.

Except it still does work. While the Apple scenario is a simplified one, the same trend holds true across most all industries: Increased consumer demand leads to increased production, leading to balance in the system.
How's that working for graphics cards right now?

The only point where production costs become a problem (in a working system at least) would be if you become production constrained (either due to raw resources or through unwillingness to invest in increased production).
Exactly. With less people being able to buy apples, you can't increase production to decrease the price.

Regardless, from a consumer point of view, the cost of said Apple should track with yearly inflation, which on average is overcome through natural wage growth.
If wage growth truly tracked inflation, we could currently live with one person in the household working and living easily, rather than two people working their asses off just to come by.

And yet, no inflation is sight.
You're not looking very hard then.

Increased interest rates leading to a reduction in consumer spending. Inflation is just a byproduct of economic activity; slow down economic activity, you slow down inflation. The trick is doing it in a way that doesn't tank the economy in the process (see: Stagflation).

That's why the Fed targets 2% for inflation rather then 0%, since it wants an economy that grows at a controlled rate rather then a stagnated one.
Inflation is a byproduct of an increase in the money supply. The economic activity is a secondary effect on inflation, not a primary one. If the money supply was by default deflationary, inflation could not happen.

And it's good that you touch on this. Because we have greatly increased the money supply last year, but, economic activity was pretty much stagnant due to the lockdowns. What happens when the economy gets going...?

Well, considering I made bank by correctly predicting the "when, how and why" of the Great Recession, I'll take my chances. Economics isn't hard, as long as you follow the correct models.
Alright. What was the why of the great recession...?
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
Well, drawing from history, there was no clear incentive for medieval European monks to copy works of antiquity down for preservation either during the Middle Ages following the collapse of Rome; regardless, they did. For crypto enthusiasts, the incentive is direct - to preserve the value they've saved once the world recovers, if not for themselves, then for their next of kin. They're going to be a lot more motivated, at any rate, than former Bank of America clerks or IRS agents are going to be.
If you look at it from one perspective, there was a significant amount of incentive for monks to copy works of antiquity. Control of the masses who believed in their work.

Needless to say, however, your comparison is of a highly non-technical feat to a highly technical feat is rather empty, IMO.


They don't need to bring it back to Earth, they just need to connect to it:

Again, a very highly technical matter. In the event of such a disaster, there is no guarantee that any technology will function much less a technology that is as sophisticated as communicating with a satellite. You may think that a trivial matter, but it takes a fair amount of technology to do so.

And even if someone does contact that wallet in space, there is no guarantee that it will end up in the hands of the rightful owners.
Call it a lingering distrust of academia, ever since it started attacking open source.

If anything, academia is highly likely to use open source software; In one instance, they attack open source. From my point of view, in that case, they have a valid point. Academia has an interest in ensuring that the open-source software that they use is secure and that no one could introduce any security compromises. Because a TS article points and says "baaaaad" does not make it so.

I am a software engineer by trade, and you just don't go around accepting code from anybody without extensive testing. That's beside the point, IMO. An "attack" as you put it, on open-source and a study on electricity consumption of cryptomining are two very different subjects.

But open source is not the issue here. Energy consumption for something that has a questionable nature/value, like cryptocurrency, is. Cryptocurrency mining consumes substantial energy and for what benefit? As I see it, cryptocurrency was conceived as an answer to a non-existent problem. It has not yet, and may never be, adopted for the "problem" it was intended to solve.
 

Bl00dyMinded

Posts: 333   +462
Guys, lets just stop feeding the trolls who don't know half the things they say. Let them drive their EV charged by fossil fuels. Who ever things crypto isn't the future are being fooled. And who ever thinks the dollar is so powerful is also being fooled. Ask yourself when was the last time you even had money in your wallet, or the amount of times you do. Everyone already uses a digital wallet. And finally, one can say and I agree the price of crypto changes every minute but doesn't the stocks do too? And how successful has that been for many?
 

terzaerian

Posts: 981   +1,419
If you look at it from one perspective, there was a significant amount of incentive for monks to copy works of antiquity. Control of the masses who believed in their work.

Needless to say, however, your comparison is of a highly non-technical feat to a highly technical feat is rather empty, IMO.
I'm not sure how copying the Odyssey helped augment monkish "control" of medieval peasants, or why that would even matter to them, seeing as monasteries tried to be self-sufficient anyway.

And their work was highly technical. The amount of skill needed to make illuminated manuscripts is arguably higher than anyone today possesses. Manufacture of vellum on the scale needed to do that is also a technical process that few today possess. It was not "non-technical," the technology needed to do it was just different.

Again, a very highly technical matter. In the event of such a disaster, there is no guarantee that any technology will function much less a technology that is as sophisticated as communicating with a satellite. You may think that a trivial matter, but it takes a fair amount of technology to do so.

And even if someone does contact that wallet in space, there is no guarantee that it will end up in the hands of the rightful owners.
There is no guarantee that all technology everywhere will be completely destroyed, either, unless the world is completely atomized by a gamma ray burst. In which case, life is snuffed out in general.

And yes, there is. Whoever holds the private keys, holds the value. As long as the holder has that key, the coins associated are theirs.
 

gamerk2

Posts: 585   +506
Historical average, yes. I REALLY doubt that's the case recently though.
Actually, yes. Wages have been growing in the neighborhood of 2.5-2.8% (depending on what metric you use), which has been (barely) keeping pace with inflation.
How's that working for graphics cards right now?
Be careful of short-term trends, especially from unforeseen events (Pandemic).

The long-term result is the same: companies are increasing production capabilities in order to meet demand. By this time next year the market will more or less be back in equilibrium again.
Exactly. With less people being able to buy apples, you can't increase production to decrease the price.
Except in my scenario that doesn't happen. Growing apples isn't raw resource based (you can grow more trees) so there isn't a production bottleneck. If demand increases, you can simply grow more to meet the demand and restore balance to the markets.

Seriously, you whole argument boils down to "Capitalism doesn't work".
If wage growth truly tracked inflation, we could currently live with one person in the household working and living easily, rather than two people working their asses off just to come by.
Don't confuse inflation with cost of living. All wages tracking inflation does is keep you where you are on the economic ladder.

Personally? I've long railed against US economic policy, since it's been *** backwards for 50 years now. I've long held that workers are massively underpaid, and that the accumulation of larger and larger percentages of the countries wealth into just a few entities will eventually be unsustainable (as consumer spending will no longer be able to keep the economy going; basically a supply-demand inversion). Regardless, that's a much longer discussion that goes beyond the bounds of your apples example.
You're not looking very hard then.
Predicted 2.3% for the year and only 2.5% for Q1 2021, still less the average wage growth and tiny to 6.3% GDP growth. Bears some watching it it rises much above 3% for more then a quarter, but nothing to be concerned about.
Inflation is a byproduct of an increase in the money supply. The economic activity is a secondary effect on inflation, not a primary one. If the money supply was by default deflationary, inflation could not happen.
You got it backwards. It isn't just the availability of money; money that isn't being spent doesn't contribute to either economic activity or inflation. [Granted, most people spend pretty much everything they make, making the difference by and large moot.]

I'd recommend reading some basic Keynes.
And it's good that you touch on this. Because we have greatly increased the money supply last year, but, economic activity was pretty much stagnant due to the lockdowns. What happens when the economy gets going...?
So far, 2.5% inflation against 6.3% GDP. So right now, my economic model is winning over yours.
Alright. What was the why of the great recession...?
A combination of an overheated housing market (driven at that point mainly by investors trading properties between themselves to hide the fact that prices were artificially high) combined with multiple industries (finance and auto for the most part, but there were others) who were overexposed to that market.

When the bubble burst, the money supply (loans) that was keeping the economy going vanished, leading to a loss of economic activity (recession). Recovery package stopped the bleeding, but wasn't enough to get the economy to the point where increases in consumer spending by itself could drive a V shaped recovery, leading to the long drawn out recovery we actually got. [Hence why Democrats would rather go big on spending this time around]

Wrote a paper outlining how/why the market would burst for my economic professor back in 2004, and predicted an early 2007 bursting of the bubble (off by half a year); ***** gave me a C, claiming my analysis was "unrealistic".
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
And their work was highly technical. The amount of skill needed to make illuminated manuscripts is arguably higher than anyone today possesses. Manufacture of vellum on the scale needed to do that is also a technical process that few today possess. It was not "non-technical," the technology needed to do it was just different.
It is still no where near the level of technology needed to connect to a satellite in space. Copying a manuscript is something that can be done by hand. Connecting to a satellite, well, if you can learn how to fly, maybe so.
There is no guarantee that all technology everywhere will be completely destroyed, either, unless the world is completely atomized by a gamma ray burst. In which case, life is snuffed out in general.

And yes, there is. Whoever holds the private keys, holds the value. As long as the holder has that key, the coins associated are theirs.
There is no guarantee that any technology will function, but what the hey, its your right to mine crypto - except if you own a crypto farm in NY and this bill even passes.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
How much is your financial freedom worth?


Wow. Ok then. I guess this explains everything.


For the ones actually interested in the truth... I'm leaving these here;



Since when are memes truthful sources? 🤣

No industry can legally guarantee financial freedom. History has had crashes before, and history will have them again. Crypto is just as subject to those crashes as any other form of currency.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 981   +1,419
It is still no where near the level of technology needed to connect to a satellite in space. Copying a manuscript is something that can be done by hand. Connecting to a satellite, well, if you can learn how to fly, maybe so.
Yes, but if you sat me down and asked me to either a) find a way to connect to a satellite or b) make an illuminated manuscript, I'd bank on being able to personally find a way to accomplish the former before the latter, as it is the skillset and means I currently possess.

Since when are memes truthful sources? 🤣
And this is why people are frustrated with academics. You provide sources and they're to automatically be fully read and fully trusted; we provide ours, and you dismiss them with a wave, regardless of the substance or lack thereof. That isn't fair.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
Yes, but if you sat me down and asked me to either a) find a way to connect to a satellite or b) make an illuminated manuscript, I'd bank on being able to personally find a way to accomplish the former before the latter, as it is the skillset I possess.
Good luck with that. I'd think copying an "illuminated manuscript" is something that almost anyone who can read and write would be able to accomplish. Connecting to a satellite, when there is no certainty that any technology will function, not so much so even with the requisite skill set.

And this is why people are frustrated with academics. You provide sources and they're to automatically be fully read and fully trusted; we provide ours, and you dismiss them with a wave, regardless of the substance or lack thereof. That isn't fair.
So you think I should call a duck a goose that lays a golden egg?

I never said you had to trust it. It was posted for your consideration; need I say that you dismissed it out of hand?

To paraphrase Shakespeare "Me thinks you doth protest too much."

One thing that seems somewhat overlooked in this thread is that crypto is only as valuable as the currency it is converted into. It is by no means an accepted universal replacement for any currency. If the value of any of those currencies goes down, so does the value of crypto.

Enjoy the speculative profitability while you can.
 

gamerk2

Posts: 585   +506
And this is why people are frustrated with academics. You provide sources and they're to automatically be fully read and fully trusted; we provide ours, and you dismiss them with a wave, regardless of the substance or lack thereof. That isn't fair.
Sure it is; one has had a lifetime of studying a specific subject, and can provide historical arguments to back up their points.

The other sprouts arguments without any expertise, examples, or understanding of the subject they are talking about, arguments which fall apart under the lightest of scrutiny. But because they say what people want to hear, even if it is wrong, they are held up as speaking "the truth", and when wrong (which it almost always is, and when right its for reasons other then what they claim) it is always for some other reason (generally some sort of conspiracy); what they spoke was and remains perfectly valid.

The fact we've reached this point of the argument means you are grasping for any straws you can. Sorry, but "some random guy on the internet says" is not a valid economic argument.
 

gamerk2

Posts: 585   +506
One thing that seems somewhat overlooked in this thread is that crypto is only as valuable as the currency it is converted into. It is by no means an accepted universal replacement for any currency. If the value of any of those currencies goes down, so does the value of crypto.
I made the point about a page back. But yes, since Crypto doesn't have any physical form to exchange, it requires some "other" currency to be converted to in order to have any real economic value. Hence why I compared Crypto to Stocks; things that have value, but only once exchanged to some other form of currency. If the currency goes under, so does the underlying value.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
Sure it is; one has had a lifetime of studying a specific subject, and can provide historical arguments to back up their points.

The other sprouts arguments without any expertise, examples, or understanding of the subject they are talking about, arguments which fall apart under the lightest of scrutiny. But because they say what people want to hear, even if it is wrong, they are held up as speaking "the truth", and when wrong (which it almost always is, and when right its for reasons other then what they claim) it is always for some other reason (generally some sort of conspiracy); what they spoke was and remains perfectly valid.

The fact we've reached this point of the argument means you are grasping for any straws you can. Sorry, but "some random guy on the internet says" is not a valid economic argument.
You stated the case perfectly. Thank you.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 981   +1,419
Sure it is; one has had a lifetime of studying a specific subject, and can provide historical arguments to back up their points.

The other sprouts arguments without any expertise, examples, or understanding of the subject they are talking about, arguments which fall apart under the lightest of scrutiny. But because they say what people want to hear, even if it is wrong, they are held up as speaking "the truth", and when wrong (which it almost always is, and when right its for reasons other then what they claim) it is always for some other reason (generally some sort of conspiracy); what they spoke was and remains perfectly valid.

The fact we've reached this point of the argument means you are grasping for any straws you can. Sorry, but "some random guy on the internet says" is not a valid economic argument.
The videos were dismissed both by you and wiyo because they were YouTube links, I doubt any of you made any serious attempt to vet the creators or address the substance of their arguments. If you're not going to make the effort to do that, then I really don't have a reason to care about those academic credentials in the paper wiyo posted either. Respect is a two-way street.
 

gamerk2

Posts: 585   +506
The videos were dismissed both by you and wiyo because they were YouTube links, I doubt any of you made any serious attempt to vet the creators. If you're not going to make the effort to do that, then I really don't have a reason to care about those academic credentials in the paper wiyo posted either. Respect is a two-way street.
Their base arguments are full of incorrect understanding of modern economics, incorrect assumptions, and a bunch of other fallacies (and a few falsehoods). In short: they're click-bait videos designed to get views from people who have been conditioned to reject Government activity as a method of growing the economy.

Simply put: the videos are designed to get people like you to click them.
 

trparky

Posts: 945   +1,009
Not just as screwed. Everyone will get screwed, but, hard assets will ultimately retain their value, no matter what they are expressed in. Having hard assets will at least make your own survival and recovery a lot better, faster and less difficult.
And there we have it folks, crypto is NOT a hard asset. By virtue of it not being a hard asset it doesn't matter when the world's economic collapse happens, crypto won't save you; you're not going to be able to outrun it no matter how hard you try. So, all of you thinking that crypto will save you when the economic collapse happens are all going to be in for a rude awakening just like the rest of us poor bastards.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 981   +1,419
Their base arguments are full of incorrect understanding of modern economics, incorrect assumptions, and a bunch of other fallacies (and a few falsehoods). In short: they're click-bait videos designed to get views from people who have been conditioned to reject Government activity as a method of growing the economy.

Simply put: the videos are designed to get people like you to click them.
Okay, now expand on this, and I'll work on digging into that paper wiyo posted and addressing that. That's how a discussion works, see? It's not rocket science.... unlike blockchain satellites.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,393   +4,725
I made the point about a page back. But yes, since Crypto doesn't have any physical form to exchange, it requires some "other" currency to be converted to in order to have any real economic value. Hence why I compared Crypto to Stocks; things that have value, but only once exchanged to some other form of currency. If the currency goes under, so does the underlying value.
Sorry I missed that post.

I think the comparison of crypto to stocks is apt. Once a stock is beyond its initial offering value, its value is driven mostly by market forces. On the other hand, crypto's value seems only driven by market forces as it had no intrinsic value when it was first conceived.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.