Bitcoin Forum

Let's say some of you hope for mass adoption (do you ?)
The CO2 emissions would be way out of hand.
Gov have to make a new treaty to forbid bitcoin mining, or to allow only green energy mining.
Forget home mining since you would have to have your own solar plant.

I want to mention though that some of you in the forum have already invested in solar plant for their bitcoin miner. I would advise them to use that electricity for better use than to enable criminal transaction to occur under the radar.

 ;)

Are you fuckin serious ?

Old FUD is old.

forbid it? You mean just like they "forbid" drugs?

Yeah, they could recycle the good old "war on drugs" and call it "war on coins"

That would be awesome. In addition to the prince increase we could reasonably expect from such nonsense, there'll also be an additional premium if we only sell BTC to law enforcement and journalists, who always seem to confuse "street value" with "the only possible value, for any quantity, ever". Good times!

I just hope it is the war on drugs they recycle - if they go down the war on terror route I'll need to drone-proof my paper wallet.

In the UK our wonderful government always appoints a "Czar" whenever they're fighting one of these wars. We'd get a Coin Czar. That sounds cool (they always sound cool).

at that point i'm sure the govenment, could help by giving his enormous solar pannel installation, the big one that is out there, i forgot the name

or use other for of energy save , electricity production

Mate, then you should also forbid cash money! Are you aware how many pollution there is and how many trees are cut every day just so you would be able to carry some Fiat bills in your wallet?

I guess you are not aware, otherwise you wouldn't start crappy thread like this one!

i wanted to say exactly the same thing about cutting trees and producing paper money.

there are a lot of factories that produce massive amounts of CO2, and in comparison mining is just a needle point. besides if CO2 emissions due to mining was serious only mining would move and no bitcoin banning can occur! besides it would move to good ol' third world countries if it were serious.

If every block is nearly empty, or nearly full, it doesn't change the mining energy required.  it gets solved and submitted no matter what.  What concerns me more is distributing the mining geographically like it used to be.

Bank overheads around the world use quite a lot of energy too.  I haven't personally seen one with a solar power installation.  I think Tesla company has a way forward, as solar costs are coming down by about 20% per year at the moment.

hahaha :o

no ::)

Oooh the shills are making it to Jr. memeber first before spreadin the fud...

ya.. not gonna work clecks.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1191177.msg12701555#msg12701555
:)

How would that make any difference? If a country finds it hard to mine because of high cost of electricity, it doesn't mean that there will not be other places where electricity would be cheap and is not under government control. Even if energy price escalate in all over the world because of restrictions, bitcoin price will go up proportionately with the rise in mining cost.

I like where you're going with this.
Do you see Bitcoin as bath salts, or more like bunk crack?

just take some DMT and decentralize your brain...

& you´d need some mdma for the p2p part.

^^
Such edge!
>DMT
used to buy legally from Sigma-Aldrich catalog back in the day.
>MDMA
friend used to make & send me from Reed College
Question stands: Do you see Bitcoin as bath salts or more like bunk crack?

You know how little Bitcoin miners are wasting in energy right now?

Do you know that 100x transactions will barely change the amount of energy used by Bitcoin miners?

Have you done any research at all or is all of your information from Al Gore?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1191177.msg12701555#msg12701555
Do read before being rude.
>100x transactions
Impossible. 7tps max, 'burst rate.'

 ~ManBearPig

http://www.coindesk.com/microscope-conclusions-costs-bitcoin/

http://media.coindesk.com/2014/07/Picture-23.png

Transactions != mining.

Added block size does nothing for energy cost.

Without checking your [dubious] data, how is gold mining/recycling related to banks, which, to our chagrin, deal exclusively with fiat money?
And how is it you've failed to read the link offered above, where the point of banks consuming more electricity than the Bitcoin network is already addressed?

Further, it's simply ludicrous to include the energy consumed by bank's offices, branches, ATM networks, etc., etc. Feel free to ask me why :)

The Bitcoin network can not handle more than 7tps.
That wouldn't be Bitcoin, but an altcoin. Mods of bitcointalk and /r/bitcoin agree.

Even if the goverments forbade bitcoin due to the global warming hoax, peercoin would take its place over night. There is no going back from cryptocurrencies. This is the new asset class and I am going to be soooo rich, with or without carbon emission.

Good proof that bitcoin uses less than others, much less than banking system.

7tps is a bit of a moot point.  The protocol can adapt to that easily, what we need is consensus on where we want it to go.

Personally I'm thinking the 2Mb/4Mb/8Mb it a decent compromise for now while we work out where it's going to go.  We can change if it turns out different than expected.  It's not baked in by any stretch of the imagination.

Therein lies the rub. No one agrees on how we should go about it, or what 'consensus' even means. 'My way or the highway' attitudes, the whole XT spectacle, 'stress tests,' the recent core patch...

That would be great. I would still call it the original bitcoin because the original bitcoin was meant to be further developed by the community. Chainging from PoW to PoS is a community development.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This.

With proper PoS, we can have staking & minting and get rid of physical mining gears. When your wallet is mining (staking and minting), very few people need to run mining hardware. No more waste of energy for mining, let's save the earth, every little bit helps. Look at Diamond coin (DMD), HyperStake (HYP), and Mintcoin. We should totally go PoS.

you saw the graphic the gold mining and reciclyng are 100 worst than computer mining or hardware mining but ok stick to the non polute energy spend its also to be used into buy food and stuff soo computers do cows no.

There are mines in Iceland where almost all power is from geothermal and hydro sources and that is likely to be the wave of the future.

I think it's a little dumb to compare Bitcoin's usage to bank usage. Bank users number in the billions. Bitcoin might be a couple of million. If it's power per user then Bitcoin is far worse. If the number of users goes up that'll fall nicely.

not true.

every transaction needs to be verified by EVERY node out there. so more transactions certainly need more energy.
but its probably negligible compared to mining.

Let's just call USD Bitcoin and be done with this.


There are a few things that use up more electricity than Bitcoin (industrial aluminum smelters, power grids of major cities, etc.) and are more detrimental to life (Zyclon B, AIDS, Bubonic plague, etc.), but none of those things [gold included] are banks or money, which is what Bitcoin is being compared to.

And you are correct, gold is ridiculous [as a store of value] in the 21st century, an anachronism. Gold's endless millennia of use (as opposed to Bitcoin's six) also gives it a bit of inertia, so phasing it out takes some time.

Gold mining is not great for environment (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/environmental-disaster-gold-industry-180949762/?no-ist).
Governments, being in the pocket of Big Business, are slow to regulate. It is happening tho.


Not even then. We should only compare bank's servers (and only those dedicated to managing transactions) to Bitcoin. We don't include the energy consumed by BitPay/NeoBee/Mt.Gox offices in the bitcoin numbers, do we?  When projects need to be financed/risks assessed/loans made [that's what banks do], Bitcoin is no different from fiat -- got to have the same wetware and the associated brick and mortar.

Nevermind, was unaware of the trollness.

Mentioning the 7tps repeatedly should've clued me in.

^^
Nothing trollish in what I said. I know that crying 'troll' once the untenability of your position becomes painfully clear is the norm 'round here, but consider addressing my points in lieu of flinging epithets.

Edit: A recent article adressing the scaling difficulties (http://www.coindesk.com/why-we-should-care-about-bitcoin-governance/). Increasing the blocksize can hardly be called a technical triviality, some are calling it 'a civil war,' with accusations of 'commercial interests [] increasingly pulling bitcoin’s development into a particular vision.' :-\

Ya, I'll get right on that.  ::)

Most of the mining is done in countries like Iceland where electricity is cheap and clean (geo-thermal).
So the pollution angle doesn't come in at all.

I do not think even mining is done in some other countries that banning of mining is possible. Because people mine with their own cost of electricity. May be government push for new regulations for standard emission control rules for ASIC miners to reduce the heat generations.

I don't think bitcoins causing pollution, there are a lot of pollutants in the world that the government needs to pay attention with.

in the meanwhile we all know that carbon emission is not doing shit to the climate and the global warming is all a big scam to fill the pockets of big corporations.

And granting more power to the government so they can use it for wars and spying on us.

Organizations using fiats produce more pollution than bitcoin. That includes the banks. They have so many computer servers and employees.