News Just 137 crypto miners use 2.3% of total U.S. power — government now requiring commercial miners to report energy consumption

[Kamen Rider Blade]

bitter and salty plus seethe. its ok not everyone has the guts to take a chance when they should. don't beat yourself up about the lost opportunities.

I don't care about Bit-Coin / CryptoCurrency.

I'd rather burn it all into the ground, destroy all the data nodes behind each coin.

Wipe out the entire distributed ledger and make CryptoCurrency WORTHLESS.

 

[YouFilthyHippo]

So the government wants to decide how people use their power? If they are paying their power bill, they are allowed to use their power for whatever they want. They're paying the bill. Leave them alone. What are you going to tell these people? Stop making money. Lol. Sorry. And for those people who say that PoW is useless and burns energy for no reason. This is false

Dynex coin is a proof of work coin that requires doing actual real work. Its neuromorphic AI. So there are no ASICs. Its 100% GPUs and GPUs only. Full decentralized, and efficient. Anyone can sign up on Dynex marketplace and run code and make AI projects with it. You can use it to cure diseases like folding at home, medical research, that sort of stuff. Most PoW is just repetative useless hash functions. That's why I recommend Dynex. It's actually useful and does something

And no it's not just one of those rent-a-rig stores like VastAI. You get access to the whole network, all 200,000+ GPUs and counting, not some random schmucks PC in his basement with a few 3060Ti's

 

[KraakBal]

Long live bitcoin. Die fiat scam, monetary slavery!
Money needs to be taken out of the government's hands, just like the church was!

 

[DavidLejdar]

Yes and no. It would be a better solution than fossil fuels but many 'clean' energies have their own costs involved, environmentally speaking. Wind farms are a hazard for birds and when at sea, there is a growing body of evidence they harm whales, dolphins and other aquatic mammals do to the sound on top of birds (again).

Then you take solar which uses up huge swaths of land that needs to be cleared and leveled. It shown to be hard on native species of plant and animals, it increases erosion from said clearing of vegetation damages the ecosystem etc etc.

And then you have nuclear power which leaves you with hazardous waste (not as bad as some people think it is but still). Now the small/modular nuclear reactor push would help but it still doesn't solve all the issues with nuclear power.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. And as stated by others...their is the fact the these facilities bill everyone for their infrastructure equally. So 97.7% of the public/commercial sector, pays for these plants that the 2.3% of crypto consumers are 'abusing'.

I am not saying there isn't workarounds. Force large mining op's to pay for these plants/upgrades would be one example that would make things fairer for the average consumer. But that still leaves all the environmental concerns attached. I am not exactly anti-crypto but I am certainly wary of the cost to our power grid and the environmental damage that entails.

The large challenge with renewables is to have a power-grid, that can transfer the enery over distances, so that it can go from where the wind blows, etc. And when e.g. Texas has its own separate power-grid, and companies involved are not fond of investing in the infrastructure thereof, then that is actually the issue, and not that the Cichuahuan Desert would have unique flora on every step.

As for the impact on fauna, in the sea the issue is about the sounds during construction. Quieter, than traditional, methods, are possible though.

As for windfarms, here in Germany, last year the ratio of renewables for electricity reached more than 50%. And some studies were had, about mortality of birds.

The main finding is that it depends a lot on where a wind farm is placed. Like when there is a lake with birds nesting, having a wind farm next to them, not so good. But in many other areas, not so much an issue. And glassed buildings and cats are still way more a factor in regard to bird mortality.

Also, as far as off-shore wind-farms are concerned, there was a study near Aberdeen, and not a single collision recorded:
https://group.vattenfall.com/press-.../unique-study-birds-avoid-wind-turbine-blades

What makes government money more legitimate than private money? There's nothing wrong with having an open permissionless and programmatically predictable technology to store and transfer value. I bet you're one of those people who cheered on the Canadian government for freezing the bank accounts of dissenters while slandering and lying about them. The energy communists on this forum are a joke.

Governments, respectively central banks, usually have an interest in price (and currency) stability. That isn't the case with crypto. And that's quite an issue, even without going into particularities, such as what is to prevent a hyper-inflation when just about everyone can print as much crypto as they want.

 

[DavidC1]

I bet you're one of those people who cheered on the Canadian government for freezing the bank accounts of dissenters while slandering and lying about them. The energy communists on this forum are a joke.

Good to see some with some sense.

Cryptocurrencies came as a result of trying to solve corruption, especially in government.

Government CBDC's on the other hand, are the complete opposite. While it might use the backbone of cryptocurrency technology, instead it'll be used for oppression and tracking the likes of which humanity has never seen before in the history of our species.

Makes me wonder how much power is used worldwide each day to power the internet?
Technically speaking we don't need the internet, as there was a time the world turned fine without the internet existing.

This is a difficult topic for sure.

The extreme end of the argument is banning all sorts of gaming hardware for being wasteful. Or heck, having our computers on discussion on this forum! TH should be shut down to save power for the power-less!

Also Wind and Solar has issues with disposal, especially when you take into account needing absolutely massive batteries.. Since "fossil" fuels are more reliable in terms of energy generation, forcing, ahem, mandating would result in societal disruption.

Same with LEDs. What happens after end of lifespan? They are 10x more complicated and dozens of times different materials used compared to incandescents. The countless chemicals will inevitably end up in landfill, even if not all of them are.

Power savings on LEDs? Maybe theoretically. But they have LEDs everywhere now. I doubt people are really saving electricity in the big picture.

We should may be putting more research and money towards improving fuel burning plants as well.

3 miles island, Chernobyl, and fukushima will never happen again.

So claimed the Titanic.

We ALWAYS need to take into account human errors. To assume it won't happen is to assume they are perfect. And this assumes forever peace, which based on current scenario and heading into false flag scenarios and WW3, makes nuclear not-so-attractive option.

Also they aren't completely clean even if meltdown doesn't occur. Towns built around nuclear plants have increased incidence of cancer.

Thorium reactors do sound much better, but no one seems to be putting resources into that so in practice, it's theoretical.

 

[ex_bubblehead]

As it has become quite clear that you people are incapable of following directives concerning off topic rants and such, this thread is now closed.

Thank you to those few that stayed on topic.