subject:"Bitcoin... Destroying the planet"


 Original message From: Kurt Buff  Date: 
12/9/17  2:50 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: 
Bitcoin... Destroying the planet 
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:24 PM, z9wahqvh  wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 9:22 PM, Michael Nelson 
> wrote:
>>
>> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point, from the
>> point of view of understanding the system. The correct mapping is between
>> Bitcoin and the *price* of energy.
>>
>> If electricity were 10 times as expensive, Bitcoin mining use of electric
>> power would drop by a factor of 10 (for a given BTC price). The point of
>> spending money on mining is to be competitive. The absolute amount of power
>> is irrelevant.
>>
>> This means that if governments raised the price of electricity, or
>> resources used for generating it, then BTC would never be a problem. Not
>> trivial to do, admittedly, but the point here is to understand the system.
>
>
> it has nothing to do with the price of energy. the price of energy is never
> mentioned in the analyses that worry about Bitcoin's energy use, and for
> good reason.
>
> the problem with Bitcoin is that it uses an enormous QUANTITY of energy to
> verify each new transaction. That amount has nothing to do with the price of
> energy. It is a quantity of energy, measured in kilowatt hours or whatever
> quantity you want (they currently use "TeraWatt hours," because it uses that
> much). It takes a certain amount of coal or oil or solar power to generate
> those kilowatt hours, and the number is rising steeply:
>
> https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption
>
> There is no mention of price in the equations that produce this analysis,
> nor should there be.
>
> IF coal and oil did not pollute and we had infinite free energy, this would
> not be a problem. But they do, and we don't, and it is, and it's getting
> worse.

You gloss over the fact that if coal and oil didn't pollute, and we
had infinite free energy, bitcoin would be (relatively)
[use|worth]less, and we'd not have to worry about most any shortage at
all.

Michael drew the correct conclusion.

Bitcoin is produced in relation to other economic goods, and under the
constraints of the costs of energy and computer infrastructure. If
those costs go up, production of bitcoin goes does, and if other
economic goods become more valuable relative to bitcoin, then again
production of bitcoin goes down.

Kurt

A total evasion of the point. Point being Dead planet" sooner than later.
Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-09 Thread Kurt Buff

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:24 PM, z9wahqvh  wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 9:22 PM, Michael Nelson 
> wrote:
>>
>> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point, from the
>> point of view of understanding the system. The correct mapping is between
>> Bitcoin and the *price* of energy.
>>
>> If electricity were 10 times as expensive, Bitcoin mining use of electric
>> power would drop by a factor of 10 (for a given BTC price). The point of
>> spending money on mining is to be competitive. The absolute amount of power
>> is irrelevant.
>>
>> This means that if governments raised the price of electricity, or
>> resources used for generating it, then BTC would never be a problem. Not
>> trivial to do, admittedly, but the point here is to understand the system.
>
>
> it has nothing to do with the price of energy. the price of energy is never
> mentioned in the analyses that worry about Bitcoin's energy use, and for
> good reason.
>
> the problem with Bitcoin is that it uses an enormous QUANTITY of energy to
> verify each new transaction. That amount has nothing to do with the price of
> energy. It is a quantity of energy, measured in kilowatt hours or whatever
> quantity you want (they currently use "TeraWatt hours," because it uses that
> much). It takes a certain amount of coal or oil or solar power to generate
> those kilowatt hours, and the number is rising steeply:
>
> https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption
>
> There is no mention of price in the equations that produce this analysis,
> nor should there be.
>
> IF coal and oil did not pollute and we had infinite free energy, this would
> not be a problem. But they do, and we don't, and it is, and it's getting
> worse.

You gloss over the fact that if coal and oil didn't pollute, and we
had infinite free energy, bitcoin would be (relatively)
[use|worth]less, and we'd not have to worry about most any shortage at
all.

Michael drew the correct conclusion.

Bitcoin is produced in relation to other economic goods, and under the
constraints of the costs of energy and computer infrastructure. If
those costs go up, production of bitcoin goes does, and if other
economic goods become more valuable relative to bitcoin, then again
production of bitcoin goes down.

Kurt

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-09 Thread z9wahqvh

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 9:22 PM, Michael Nelson 
wrote:

> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point, from the
> point of view of understanding the system. The correct mapping is between
> Bitcoin and the *price* of energy.
>
> If electricity were 10 times as expensive, Bitcoin mining use of electric
> power would drop by a factor of 10 (for a given BTC price). The point of
> spending money on mining is to be competitive. The absolute amount of power
> is irrelevant.
>
> This means that if governments raised the price of electricity, or
> resources used for generating it, then BTC would never be a problem. Not
> trivial to do, admittedly, but the point here is to understand the system.
>

it has nothing to do with the price of energy. the price of energy is never
mentioned in the analyses that worry about Bitcoin's energy use, and for
good reason.

the problem with Bitcoin is that it uses an enormous QUANTITY of energy to
verify each new transaction. That amount has nothing to do with the price
of energy. It is a quantity of energy, measured in kilowatt hours or
whatever quantity you want (they currently use "TeraWatt hours," because it
uses that much). It takes a certain amount of coal or oil or solar power to
generate those kilowatt hours, and the number is rising steeply:

https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption

There is no mention of price in the equations that produce this analysis,
nor should there be.

IF coal and oil did not pollute and we had infinite free energy, this would
not be a problem. But they do, and we don't, and it is, and it's getting
worse.

- z

Fwd: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-09 Thread Kurt Buff

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 11:57 AM, g2s  wrote:
>  Original message 
> From: Kurt Buff 
> Date: 12/9/17 11:37 AM (GMT-08:00)
> To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
>
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 7:24 AM, g2s  wrote:
> >  Original message 
> > From: Kurt Buff 
> > Date: 12/8/17 8:42 PM (GMT-08:00)
> > To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> > Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:31 PM, g2s  wrote:
> > >
> > >  Original message 
> > > From: Michael Nelson 
> > > Date: 12/8/17 6:22 PM (GMT-08:00)
> > > To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> > > Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
> > >
> > >> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
> > >
> > > Not if the point is a dead planet.
> > >
> > > That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much 
> > > thornier
> > > issue because they've been made a social necessity and that will take time
> > > to undo. As with another not often acknowledged source of carbon based
> > > pollution due to humans... The factories that make damn near everything
> > > consumer industrial societies have.
> > >
> > > But unlike those things, bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due 
> > > to
> > > its electric demands, and, bluntly, it isn't necessary in any way shape or
> > > form.
> >
> >
> > Neither are coffee, tea, chocolate, sugar, sex and any number of other
> > things that offend the sensibilities of the overly sensitive, and they
> > aren't likely to disappear either...
> >
> > Kurt
> >
> > You denigrate your point by stating sex isn't necessary. Ropes whips and 
> > ioT glow in the dark vibrators aren't, but sex is as necessary to the 
> > survival of humans as sleep is.
> >
> > Rr
>
> > Artificial insemination
>
> sik fuk

IVF, too. It's quite normal, so really, sex isn't "necessary". Sure is
fun, though.

> > And I find that most who decry the use of "unnecessary things' by
> others
>
> You think I include myself out? Really?
>
> Hahahaha!

No, I think you belong squarely in the category of moral pecksniffs
who would deny "unnecessary things" to others to "save the planet".

> Tell you what. Save evolution the work. Extinct yourself now...
>
> Rr

Too late - I already have two children. I just wish I had more. Also,
I burn wood in my fireplace, and have both a car and a big ol' pickup
truck, and I commute with the latter to work, getting roughly 9-10
mpg.

Kurt

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet


 Original message From: Kurt Buff  Date: 
12/9/17  11:37 AM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: 
Bitcoin... Destroying the planet 
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 7:24 AM, g2s  wrote:
>  Original message 
> From: Kurt Buff 
> Date: 12/8/17 8:42 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
>
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:31 PM, g2s  wrote:
> >
> >  Original message 
> > From: Michael Nelson 
> > Date: 12/8/17 6:22 PM (GMT-08:00)
> > To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> > Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
> >
> >> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
> >
> > Not if the point is a dead planet.
> >
> > That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much thornier
> > issue because they've been made a social necessity and that will take time
> > to undo. As with another not often acknowledged source of carbon based
> > pollution due to humans... The factories that make damn near everything
> > consumer industrial societies have.
> >
> > But unlike those things, bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due to
> > its electric demands, and, bluntly, it isn't necessary in any way shape or
> > form.
>
>
> Neither are coffee, tea, chocolate, sugar, sex and any number of other
> things that offend the sensibilities of the overly sensitive, and they
> aren't likely to disappear either...
>
> Kurt
>
> You denigrate your point by stating sex isn't necessary. Ropes whips and ioT 
> glow in the dark vibrators aren't, but sex is as necessary to the survival of 
> humans as sleep is.
>
> Rr

> Artificial insemination
sik fuk

> And I find that most who decry the use of "unnecessary things' by
others
You think I include myself out? Really?
Hahahaha!

 > because of the danger to the planet, also tend to be against
perpetuation of the species anyway.
Tell you what. Save evolution the work. Extinct yourself now... 

Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

 Original message From: juan  Date: 12/9/17 
 8:13 AM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: Bitcoin... 
Destroying the planet 
On Fri, 08 Dec 2017 19:31:27 -0800
g2s  wrote:

> 
>  Original message From: Michael Nelson
>  Date: 12/8/17  6:22 PM  (GMT-08:00) To:
> cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the
> planet 
> > The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
> Not if the point is a dead planet.
> That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much
> thornier issue because they've been made a social necessity 

>>  ahh the piece of fascist joo shit rayzer is actually a ford motors inc. 
>>shill 

You quite obviously didn't read what I wrote or have a severely 
intellectually-challenged mind.
Or both. Both.
Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-09 Thread Kurt Buff

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 7:24 AM, g2s  wrote:
>  Original message 
> From: Kurt Buff 
> Date: 12/8/17 8:42 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
>
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:31 PM, g2s  wrote:
> >
> >  Original message 
> > From: Michael Nelson 
> > Date: 12/8/17 6:22 PM (GMT-08:00)
> > To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> > Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
> >
> >> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
> >
> > Not if the point is a dead planet.
> >
> > That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much thornier
> > issue because they've been made a social necessity and that will take time
> > to undo. As with another not often acknowledged source of carbon based
> > pollution due to humans... The factories that make damn near everything
> > consumer industrial societies have.
> >
> > But unlike those things, bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due to
> > its electric demands, and, bluntly, it isn't necessary in any way shape or
> > form.
>
>
> Neither are coffee, tea, chocolate, sugar, sex and any number of other
> things that offend the sensibilities of the overly sensitive, and they
> aren't likely to disappear either...
>
> Kurt
>
> You denigrate your point by stating sex isn't necessary. Ropes whips and ioT 
> glow in the dark vibrators aren't, but sex is as necessary to the survival of 
> humans as sleep is.
>
> Rr

Artificial insemination.

And I find that most who decry the use of "unnecessary things' by
others because of the danger to the planet, also tend to be against
perpetuation of the species anyway.

Kurt

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-09 Thread juan

On Fri, 08 Dec 2017 19:31:27 -0800
g2s  wrote:

> 
>  Original message From: Michael Nelson
>  Date: 12/8/17  6:22 PM  (GMT-08:00) To:
> cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the
> planet 
> > The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
> Not if the point is a dead planet.
> That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much
> thornier issue because they've been made a social necessity 

ahh the piece of fascist joo shit rayzer is actually a ford
motors inc. shill - then again, hardly surprising. Whether it's
commie concentration camps, US false flag attacks, or the
american way of life, rayzer is always on the establishment's
side.

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet


 Original message From: Green Peas  
Date: 12/9/17  1:16 AM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org, 
g...@riseup.net Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet 
> g2s g2s at riseup.net
> Fri Dec 8 19:31:27 PST 2017
> 

> dead planet
> "muh global warming"
> 

You can't kill the planet.
The planet kills us.
Point made.

> carbon based pollution
> 

You stupid motherfucker.
Trees breath carbon dioxide and filter out the carbon.  Increases in carbon gas 
emission increase the health and number of plant life on the "planet".
What trees? You mean the ones they made your ticky tacky 
lasts-50-years-before-it-comes-apart wood frame house? The planet has been 
denuded of a HUGE amount of its resources and species... since the industrial 
"revolution".

> due to humans
> 

The greatest "greenhouse gas" is water vapor.

I thought it was cow farts.
Is that you Ronnie Ragging?
Did you know ~60% of the Antarctic melts and re freezes every year?
Ever heard of the Younger Dryas?
Or ice/ocean/soil core samples?

All this disproves your shekel grabbing scheme's premise that humans, and their 
pesky cars, are "killing the planet" with CO2 (“muh breath”).

In Rayzer's future, if you want exercise more and live a more healthful life, 
"that'll be more cryptoshekels, sir".

> bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution
> due to its electric demands
> 

Show how or GTFO.

Bye troll.

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet


 Original message From: Kurt Buff  Date: 
12/8/17  8:42 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: 
Bitcoin... Destroying the planet 
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:31 PM, g2s  wrote:
>
>  Original message 
> From: Michael Nelson 
> Date: 12/8/17 6:22 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
>
>> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
>
> Not if the point is a dead planet.
>
> That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much thornier
> issue because they've been made a social necessity and that will take time
> to undo. As with another not often acknowledged source of carbon based
> pollution due to humans... The factories that make damn near everything
> consumer industrial societies have.
>
> But unlike those things, bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due to
> its electric demands, and, bluntly, it isn't necessary in any way shape or
> form.


Neither are coffee, tea, chocolate, sugar, sex and any number of other
things that offend the sensibilities of the overly sensitive, and they
aren't likely to disappear either...

Kurt

You denigrate your point by stating sex isn't necessary. Ropes whips and ioT 
glow in the dark vibrators aren't, but sex is as necessary to the survival of 
humans as sleep is.
Rr

Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-09 Thread Green Peas

> Michael Nelson nelson_mikel at yahoo.com
> Fri Dec 8 18:22:28 PST 2017
> 

> Whereas an automobile still uses the same
> amount of fuel to get you from A to B,
> when you raise the price of fuel, Bitcoin
> instantly drops the amount of fuel it uses,
> but continues to function just as well.
> 

Wut?

The coin "fuel" drops with price increase because less people "use"
it; mining and transactions.
A road/automobile does the same. Less people "use" it due to cost. The
model functions just as well.

This is the future of the blockchain. Payments for road access +
transaction fees (way better than those horrible withdrawal fees), and
added taxes for "carbon pollution" and for human-piloted vehicle
"licensing" and "insurance".

> blame governments
> for allowing the tolerance of [automobiles]
> 

What is wrong with you eco-commie fucks.
Automobiles can be anything-powered.
The combustion engine was designed to run on compost alcohol with
emissions that feed the trees. You can't get more environmentally
friendly than that.

"muh carbon"
"muh car"
"muh c"

Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-09 Thread Green Peas

> g2s g2s at riseup.net
> Fri Dec 8 19:31:27 PST 2017
> 

> dead planet
> "muh global warming"
> 

You can't kill the planet.
The planet kills us.

> carbon based pollution
> 

You stupid motherfucker.
Trees breath carbon dioxide and filter out the carbon.  Increases in
carbon gas emission increase the health and number of plant life on
the "planet".

> due to humans
> 

The greatest "greenhouse gas" is water vapor.
Did you know ~60% of the Antarctic melts and re freezes every year?
Ever heard of the Younger Dryas?
Or ice/ocean/soil core samples?

All this disproves your shekel grabbing scheme's premise that humans,
and their pesky cars, are "killing the planet" with CO2 (“muh
breath”).

In Rayzer's future, if you want exercise more and live a more
healthful life, "that'll be more cryptoshekels, sir".

> bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution
> due to its electric demands
> 

Show how or GTFO.

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread Kurt Buff

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:31 PM, g2s  wrote:
>
>  Original message 
> From: Michael Nelson 
> Date: 12/8/17 6:22 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
> Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
>
>> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
>
> Not if the point is a dead planet.
>
> That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much thornier
> issue because they've been made a social necessity and that will take time
> to undo. As with another not often acknowledged source of carbon based
> pollution due to humans... The factories that make damn near everything
> consumer industrial societies have.
>
> But unlike those things, bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due to
> its electric demands, and, bluntly, it isn't necessary in any way shape or
> form.


Neither are coffee, tea, chocolate, sugar, sex and any number of other
things that offend the sensibilities of the overly sensitive, and they
aren't likely to disappear either...

Kurt

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread g2s


 Original message From: Michael Nelson  
Date: 12/8/17  6:22 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: 
Bitcoin... Destroying the planet 
> The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point...
Not if the point is a dead planet.
That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much thornier 
issue because they've been made a social necessity and that will take time to 
undo. As with another not often acknowledged source of carbon based pollution 
due to humans... The factories that make damn near everything consumer 
industrial societies have.
But unlike those things, bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due to its 
electric demands, and, bluntly, it isn't necessary in any way shape or form.
Rr

Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread Michael Nelson

The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point, from the point of 
view of understanding the system. The correct mapping is between Bitcoin and 
the *price* of energy.
If electricity were 10 times as expensive, Bitcoin mining use of electric power 
would drop by a factor of 10 (for a given BTC price). The point of spending 
money on mining is to be competitive. The absolute amount of power is 
irrelevant.

This means that if governments raised the price of electricity, or resources 
used for generating it, then BTC would never be a problem. Not trivial to do, 
admittedly, but the point here is to understand the system.

With things like automobiles and air-conditioners, raising electricity prices 
would improve the situation (regarding what economists call "externalities"), 
but degrade the user experience. Well, raising prices would improve the 
external impact of Bitcoin, but would have no effect on the correct functioning 
of the Bitcoin model. Whereas an automobile still uses the same amount of fuel 
to get you from A to B, when you raise the price of fuel, Bitcoin instantly 
drops the amount of fuel it uses, but continues to function just as well.
Interestingly, environmentalists do not so much blame the automobile and the 
drivers as much as governments for allowing the tolerance of them, and rightly 
so. They say that we need fuel prices and taxes that reflect the impact on the 
environment, and we need support for alternative energy sources, etc. So why 
blame poor old Bitcoin?
Mike

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread g2s

Ps. https://twitter.com/vexmark/status/938780120990568448

 Original message From: g2s  Date: 12/8/17  
3:12 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Cc: cypherpunks 
 Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet 

 Original message From: Steven Schear  
Date: 12/8/17  10:49 AM  (GMT-08:00) To: juan  Cc: 
cypherpunks  Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying 
the planet 
In #meetoo fashion the flippening is going to happen this week when drudge news 
shows a bitcoin core developer get accused of grabbing an interns breast, and 
everyone dumps BTC.

+1.
Rr
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:45 PM, juan  wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 16:12:41 -0800

Steven Schear  wrote:

> Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin

> Unlimited blockchains could be >> efficient yet.

        So Steve you were talking about some sort of "flipping" or

        something a while back? How's that going?

        right now bitcoin is at $18000* while bcash is $1300

        *stupid bubble of course.

-- 
Creator of the Warrant Canary and the Street Performer Protocol. Wi-Fi standard 
spec. creation participant and co-developer of eCache. Director at MojoNation 
and Cylink. Founding member of IFCA and GNU Radio. Currently, VP of 
BusinessTechnology at Stashcrypto.com

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread g2s

 Original message From: Steven Schear  
Date: 12/8/17  10:49 AM  (GMT-08:00) To: juan  Cc: 
cypherpunks  Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying 
the planet 
In #meetoo fashion the flippening is going to happen this week when drudge news 
shows a bitcoin core developer get accused of grabbing an interns breast, and 
everyone dumps BTC.

+1.
Rr
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:45 PM, juan  wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 16:12:41 -0800

Steven Schear  wrote:

> Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin

> Unlimited blockchains could be >> efficient yet.

        So Steve you were talking about some sort of "flipping" or

        something a while back? How's that going?

        right now bitcoin is at $18000* while bcash is $1300

        *stupid bubble of course.

-- 
Creator of the Warrant Canary and the Street Performer Protocol. Wi-Fi standard 
spec. creation participant and co-developer of eCache. Director at MojoNation 
and Cylink. Founding member of IFCA and GNU Radio. Currently, VP of 
BusinessTechnology at Stashcrypto.com

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread Marina Brown

On 12/08/2017 01:39 PM, Mirimir wrote:
> On 12/08/2017 07:29 AM, Temple OS User wrote:
>>> g2s g2s at wiseup.net
>>> Thu Dec 7 12:05:26 PST 2017
>>>
>>
>>> bitcoin network uses electricity
>>> In 18 months, we'll all be dead.
>>> "muh planet"
>>>
>>
>> You faggot.
> 
> Ah, I see. Another fucking Zenaan or Juan clone. Bye.
> 
>> Using electricity isn't going to "destroy" the planet.  Do you even know
>> what energy is? Or how the flat earth spins?
>>
>> [pic related]
>>
> 

Aren't we getting near the end of the blockchain ?

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread Steven Schear

In #meetoo fashion the flippening is going to happen this week when drudge
news shows a bitcoin core developer get accused of grabbing an interns
breast, and everyone dumps BTC.

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:45 PM, juan  wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 16:12:41 -0800
> Steven Schear  wrote:
>
>
> > Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin
> > Unlimited blockchains could be >> efficient yet.
>
>
> So Steve you were talking about some sort of "flipping" or
> something a while back? How's that going?
>
> right now bitcoin is at $18000* while bcash is $1300
>
>
> *stupid bubble of course.
>
>
>


-- 
Creator of the Warrant Canary and the Street Performer Protocol. Wi-Fi
standard spec. creation participant and co-developer of eCache. Director at
MojoNation and Cylink. Founding member of IFCA and GNU Radio. Currently, VP
of BusinessTechnology at Stashcrypto.com

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-08 Thread Mirimir

On 12/08/2017 07:29 AM, Temple OS User wrote:
>> g2s g2s at wiseup.net
>> Thu Dec 7 12:05:26 PST 2017
>>
> 
>> bitcoin network uses electricity
>> In 18 months, we'll all be dead.
>> "muh planet"
>>
> 
> You faggot.

Ah, I see. Another fucking Zenaan or Juan clone. Bye.

> Using electricity isn't going to "destroy" the planet.  Do you even know
> what energy is? Or how the flat earth spins?
> 
> [pic related]
>

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet



conclusion : trolling piece of shit rayzer doesn't know how to
calculate energy consumption from hashrate and just posts
garbage he reads on the interweb

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet


Scumbag wrote

> Do you even know what that means? 
Yep. I also know it matters no fucks if you measured it in Joules... scumbag.
Rr

> 
>   we are still waiting for you to show that you able to
> calculate Blah blah... From that ars technical link

> However, we can make some educated guesses. For starters, we know the
> industry's revenue: Bitcoin miners currently generate 75 bitcoins per
> hour, which, at the current price of around $12,500 per bitcoin,
> translates to $937,500 per hour, or more than $8 billion per year.


hey stupid piece of joo shit, you still don't understand the
very basics of what you are supposed to calculate? you keep
copy pasting irrelevant shit? 
 
you are supposed to give an estimate of energy usage. Watts per
hour. Do you even know what that means? 





> 
> Moreover, the industry is highly competitive, and electricity is one
> of its biggest costs. So when the price of bitcoins rises, we can
> expect miners to spend more and more on electricity until electricity
> costs are roughly on par with revenues.
> 
> This is the methodology the Digiconomist (link... use it scumbag.)
> website uses to estimate the Bitcoin network's energy consumption. It
> assumes that the industry will spend 60 percent of its revenue on
> electricity and then extrapolates from the current bitcoin price and
> prevailing electricity prices. It finds that the network is consuming
> energy at an annual rate of 32TWh.
> 
> It also assumes that the network takes time to adjust to big price
> increases like we've seen in recent days. This means that, if Bitcoin
> stays above $12,000, we can expect this figure to rise further in the
> coming weeks." Rr
>

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:10:32 -0800
g2s  wrote:


> 
>   we are still waiting for you to show that you able to
> calculate Blah blah... From that ars technical link

> However, we can make some educated guesses. For starters, we know the
> industry's revenue: Bitcoin miners currently generate 75 bitcoins per
> hour, which, at the current price of around $12,500 per bitcoin,
> translates to $937,500 per hour, or more than $8 billion per year.


hey stupid piece of joo shit, you still don't understand the
very basics of what you are supposed to calculate? you keep
copy pasting irrelevant shit? 
 
you are supposed to give an estimate of energy usage. Watts per
hour. Do you even know what that means? 





> 
> Moreover, the industry is highly competitive, and electricity is one
> of its biggest costs. So when the price of bitcoins rises, we can
> expect miners to spend more and more on electricity until electricity
> costs are roughly on par with revenues.
> 
> This is the methodology the Digiconomist (link... use it scumbag.)
> website uses to estimate the Bitcoin network's energy consumption. It
> assumes that the industry will spend 60 percent of its revenue on
> electricity and then extrapolates from the current bitcoin price and
> prevailing electricity prices. It finds that the network is consuming
> energy at an annual rate of 32TWh.
> 
> It also assumes that the network takes time to adjust to big price
> increases like we've seen in recent days. This means that, if Bitcoin
> stays above $12,000, we can expect this figure to rise further in the
> coming weeks." Rr
>

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

 Original message From: juan  Date: 12/7/17 
 5:08 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: g2s  Subject: Re: Bitcoin... 
Destroying the planet 
On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 16:58:22 -0800
g2s  wrote:

> 
> The scumbag said

we are still waiting for you to show that you able to calculate Blah 
blah...
From that ars technical link
However, we can make some educated guesses. For starters, we know the 
industry's revenue: Bitcoin miners currently generate 75 bitcoins per hour, 
which, at the current price of around $12,500 per bitcoin, translates to 
$937,500 per hour, or more than $8 billion per year.

Moreover, the industry is highly competitive, and electricity is one of its 
biggest costs. So when the price of bitcoins rises, we can expect miners to 
spend more and more on electricity until electricity costs are roughly on par 
with revenues.

This is the methodology the Digiconomist (link... use it scumbag.) website uses 
to estimate the Bitcoin network's energy consumption. It assumes that the 
industry will spend 60 percent of its revenue on electricity and then 
extrapolates from the current bitcoin price and prevailing electricity prices. 
It finds that the network is consuming energy at an annual rate of 32TWh.

It also assumes that the network takes time to adjust to big price increases 
like we've seen in recent days. This means that, if Bitcoin stays above 
$12,000, we can expect this figure to rise further in the coming weeks."
Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

From offlist. I REALLY WISH the server admin would mask source addresses of 
posters.
 Original message From: juan  Date: 12/7/17 
 5:08 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: g2s  Subject: Re: Bitcoin... 
Destroying the planet 
On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 16:58:22 -0800
g2s  wrote:

> 
> The scumbag said

we are still waiting for you to show that you able to calculate
how much energy is used instead of posting click bait garbage 

what's the problem? You don't know basic arithmetic? 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoins-insane-energy-consumption-explained/
Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-07 Thread Steven Schear

It's going great, actually. Bitcoin Cash uptake is growing dramatically
and, unlike Bitcoin Core, is entirely practical for commerce.

As for the flippening it clearly hasn't happened. While it's price has
appreciated it's not a hockey stick. I'm still hopeful the recent code
changes will, probably after the next price crash of Core, enable it to
close the miner profitably gap.

On Dec 7, 2017 4:42 PM, "juan"  wrote:

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 16:12:41 -0800
Steven Schear  wrote:

> Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin
> Unlimited blockchains could be >> efficient yet.

So Steve you were talking about some sort of "flipping" or
something a while back? How's that going?

right now bitcoin is at $18000* while bcash is $1300

*stupid bubble of course.

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet


The scumbag said
On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 16:19:23 -0800
g2s  wrote:

> I dont see where this is a rumor.


...because estimating how much energy is being used in hashing
is rather easy. 

so posting completely unsourced garbage like rayzer does is
beyond pathetic...


https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 16:12:41 -0800
Steven Schear  wrote:

> Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin
> Unlimited blockchains could be >> efficient yet.

So Steve you were talking about some sort of "flipping" or
something a while back? How's that going? 

right now bitcoin is at $18000* while bcash is $1300

*stupid bubble of course.

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 16:19:23 -0800
g2s  wrote:

> I dont see where this is a rumor.


...because estimating how much energy is being used in hashing
is rather easy. 

so posting completely unsourced garbage like rayzer does is
beyond pathetic...

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

Department of Irony
Libertarians hate fiat money but love the idea of a currency whose value is
linked to consuming as much energy as a European nation state
https://twitter.com/IronyDept/status/938928573368299521
Rr
Original message From: g2s Date: 12/7/17
4:19 PM (GMT-08:00) To: Edward Low ,
cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
I dont see where this is a rumor.
Rr
Original message From: Edward Low Date:
12/7/17 4:16 PM (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re:
Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

This Denmark-energy rumour comes from this article, if i'm not
wrong:

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/aek3za/bitcoin-could-consume-as-much-electricity-as-denmark-by-2020
P.D: Leave out
fights-promotion-BTC-core-segwit-cash-gold-unlimited-bla-bla-bla
from the list please...

El 08/12/17 a las 01:12, Steven Schear
escribió:

The Bitcoin Core mining can remain profitable
using up to at least 24 TWh annually. That said, as the periodic
halvings reduce awards the fees, which are already to high to
make it useful for commerce, may soon make it problematic for
investment.

Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy
efficient and Bitcoin Unlimited blockchains could be >>
efficient yet.

On Dec 7, 2017 12:05 PM, "g2s"
wrote:

Bitcoin. A gambling game only a
capitalist scumbag would play. Tim May was wrong. Btc
IS NOT the future. It's a dead end leading to a dead
planet.

The bitcoin computer network currently uses as much
electricity as Denmark. In 18 months, it will use as
much as the entire United States.

https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/amp/

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-07 Thread Edward Low


True, not really rumour but supposition

"Bitcoin COULD consume [...]"



El 08/12/17 a las 01:19, g2s escribió:

I dont see where this is a rumor.

Rr

 Original message 
From: Edward Low 
Date: 12/7/17 4:16 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

This Denmark-energy rumour comes from this article, if i'm not wrong:

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/aek3za/bitcoin-could-consume-as-much-electricity-as-denmark-by-2020

P.D: Leave out 
fights-promotion-BTC-core-segwit-cash-gold-unlimited-bla-bla-bla from 
the list please...



El 08/12/17 a las 01:12, Steven Schear escribió:
The Bitcoin Core mining can remain profitable using up to at least 24 
TWh annually. That said, as the periodic halvings reduce awards the 
fees, which are already to high to make it useful for commerce, may 
soon make it problematic for investment.


Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin 
Unlimited blockchains could be >> efficient yet.


On Dec 7, 2017 12:05 PM, "g2s" <mailto:g...@riseup.net>> wrote:


Bitcoin. A gambling game only a capitalist scumbag would play.
Tim May was wrong. Btc IS NOT the future. It's a dead end leading
to a dead planet.

The bitcoin computer network currently uses as much electricity
as Denmark. In 18 months, it will use as much as the entire
United States.

https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/amp/

<https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/amp/>

Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

I dont see where this is a rumor.
Rr
 Original message From: Edward Low  Date: 
12/7/17  4:16 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: 
Bitcoin... Destroying the planet 

This Denmark-energy rumour comes from this article, if i'm not
  wrong:

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/aek3za/bitcoin-could-consume-as-much-electricity-as-denmark-by-2020
P.D: Leave out
  fights-promotion-BTC-core-segwit-cash-gold-unlimited-bla-bla-bla
  from the list please...


El 08/12/17 a las 01:12, Steven Schear
  escribió:



  The Bitcoin Core mining can remain profitable
using up to at least 24 TWh annually. That said, as the periodic
halvings reduce awards the fees, which are already to high to
make it useful for commerce, may soon make it problematic for
investment.



Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy
  efficient and Bitcoin Unlimited blockchains could be >>
  efficient yet.
  
  

On Dec 7, 2017 12:05 PM, "g2s" 
  wrote:

  
Bitcoin. A gambling game only a
capitalist scumbag would play. Tim May was wrong. Btc
IS NOT the future. It's a dead end leading to a dead
planet.
  

  The bitcoin computer network currently uses as much
  electricity as Denmark. In 18 months, it will use as
  much as the entire United States.
  


  
https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/amp/
  


  Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-07 Thread Edward Low


This Denmark-energy rumour comes from this article, if i'm not wrong:

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/aek3za/bitcoin-could-consume-as-much-electricity-as-denmark-by-2020

P.D: Leave out 
fights-promotion-BTC-core-segwit-cash-gold-unlimited-bla-bla-bla from 
the list please...



El 08/12/17 a las 01:12, Steven Schear escribió:
The Bitcoin Core mining can remain profitable using up to at least 24 
TWh annually. That said, as the periodic halvings reduce awards the 
fees, which are already to high to make it useful for commerce, may 
soon make it problematic for investment.


Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin 
Unlimited blockchains could be >> efficient yet.


On Dec 7, 2017 12:05 PM, "g2s" > wrote:


Bitcoin. A gambling game only a capitalist scumbag would play. Tim
May was wrong. Btc IS NOT the future. It's a dead end leading to a
dead planet.

The bitcoin computer network currently uses as much electricity as
Denmark. In 18 months, it will use as much as the entire United
States.

https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/amp/



Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

2017-12-07 Thread Steven Schear

The Bitcoin Core mining can remain profitable using up to at least 24 TWh
annually. That said, as the periodic halvings reduce awards the fees, which
are already to high to make it useful for commerce, may soon make it
problematic for investment.

Bitcoin Cash is up to 8 times more energy efficient and Bitcoin Unlimited
blockchains could be >> efficient yet.

On Dec 7, 2017 12:05 PM, "g2s"  wrote:

Bitcoin. A gambling game only a capitalist scumbag would play. Tim May was
wrong. Btc IS NOT the future. It's a dead end leading to a dead planet.

The bitcoin computer network currently uses as much electricity as Denmark.
In 18 months, it will use as much as the entire United States.

https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/amp/

Rr

Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet

On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 12:05:26 -0800
g2s  wrote:

>  The bitcoin computer network currently uses as much
> electricity as Denmark. 


and you know that, how, exactly?

Bitcoin... Destroying the planet