Title: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on November 02, 2017, 02:54:13 AM I opened a url for an article (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ywbbpm/bitcoin-mining-electricity-consumption-ethereum-energy-climate-change) in motherboard.vice.com and I was hit hard at the moment I read the title, "One Bitcoin Transaction Now Uses as Much Energy as Your House in a Week".
This is what the Burst community and the PoCC have been fighting for. A more energy efficient form of mining because securing the blockchain and the blockchain itself is inefficient. I hope some of you can see beyond your potential earnings and start supporting a project that wants to make a difference. Here are some notes from the article (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ywbbpm/bitcoin-mining-electricity-consumption-ethereum-energy-climate-change).
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: BluRPie on November 02, 2017, 03:00:09 AM Not agree with article. There are so many depends, what kid of energy spending for mining? Some mining farm placed in the locations with overage of energy and it is not possible to get money from this energy in other way
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: amrulshare on November 02, 2017, 03:12:25 AM yes, it is possible
because hashrate and difficult increase day by day and it is not in line with manufacturers CPU or GPU ::) Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: pinkflower on November 02, 2017, 03:41:10 AM Not agree with article. There are so many depends, what kid of energy spending for mining? Some mining farm placed in the locations with overage of energy and it is not possible to get money from this energy in other way But wastefulness is wastefulness, and its not practical that all mining farms can collocate in a single area to take advantage of an untapped energy source. Theres also the problem of carbon emissions and pollution. We are destroying the planet and proof of work, while a leap forward for decentralization when applied on blockchains, is making things worse for the environment.
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: pinkflower on November 12, 2017, 01:10:30 AM Heres another proof that Proof of Capacity, or some call it Proof of Space, is the future of mining. Bram Cohen, creator of the Bittorrent protocol, has announced his new project called the Chia Network (https://bitcoinist.com/bittorrent-bram-cohen-bitcoin-rival-chia/).
But its release is still one year away, so for now theres only Burst for HDD mining. Please support it to help its development on PoC go on further. The planet will be better off for it. Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: andthereyou on November 12, 2017, 07:21:27 AM I think that is impossible. However if that is true then people will lose faith in bitcoin because the transaction fee will surely become high. People will forget bitcoin and they will invest in altcoin instead of bitcoin.
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: pinkflower on November 24, 2017, 02:48:00 AM I found another study about BTC mining's power consumption and how much higher it can go next year. Its simply not sustainable from my perspective, and reasonably, it should be your perspective too. But why do we keep denying it?
Bitcoin mining consumes more electricity than 20+ European countries (https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2017/11/23/bitcoin-mining-electricity-africa/)
Save the planet. Support Proof of Capacity. Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: Crypington on November 24, 2017, 03:08:43 AM Yeah, I don’t think this fits with Saotshi’s vision, to use the equalvent of 100s of kWh mining one transaction ... and each block has few thousand transactions. Lots of energy being used for a process that should use a tiny bit of electricity ... sending a few bytes on the Internet.
It makes a stronge case for POS, Proof of capacity, GPU only aglos, etc.... Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: rico666 on November 24, 2017, 07:21:25 AM When it comes to this topic, I remember this infographic
https://www.burstcoin.ist/2017/09/22/how-burst-puts-bitcoin-to-shame/ and because it might be biased, did some computations and estimates on my own. The "ca. 400x times more energy efficient" figure is founded though. So if Burst blockchain was met with the same mining vigor as BTC is met today, the energy consumption would be 60 Gigawatt-hours annually (164 Megawatt-hours daily), or the equivalent of ~ 6.8 Megawatt for continuous operation - worldwide. 6.8 Megawatt is already in the range of a single luxury mega yacht. Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: pinkflower on December 07, 2017, 02:39:53 AM When will the wasteful use of energy end? The answer is never, as long as the price is of a PoW cryptocurrency is going up. But it doesnt have to be like this forever. Help us rally the cause for energy efficient alternatives like Burst's Proof of Capacity (https://www.burst-coin.org/proof-of-capacity).
BITCOIN MINING GUZZLES ENERGY—AND ITS CARBON FOOTPRINT JUST KEEPS GROWING (https://www.wired.com/story/bitcoin-mining-guzzles-energyand-its-carbon-footprint-just-keeps-growing/) Reddit Discussion (https://www.reddit.com/r/burstcoin/comments/7i3k84/we_need_to_rally_the_burst_cause/)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: pinkflower on December 08, 2017, 02:59:13 AM No, Bitcoin Won't Boil the Oceans (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-12-07/bitcoin-is-greener-than-its-critics-think)
I highly disagree with that article. They are trying to justify it by reporting that BTC's power consumption is less than what the whole world's banking system energy consumption. While this is true, it doesnt mean we can change the financial system to use only BTC. But they will say anything to up the price. Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: stripykitteh on December 10, 2017, 11:38:16 PM I opened a url for an article (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ywbbpm/bitcoin-mining-electricity-consumption-ethereum-energy-climate-change) in motherboard.vice.com and I was hit hard at the moment I read the title, "One Bitcoin Transaction Now Uses as Much Energy as Your House in a Week". Bitcoin mining is probably going to increase the electricity bill for the people in Bitcoin dominant countries.This is what the Burst community and the PoCC have been fighting for. A more energy efficient form of mining because securing the blockchain and the blockchain itself is inefficient. I hope some of you can see beyond your potential earnings and start supporting a project that wants to make a difference. Here are some notes from the article (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ywbbpm/bitcoin-mining-electricity-consumption-ethereum-energy-climate-change).
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: pinkflower on December 11, 2017, 01:48:56 AM I found another article trying to defend BTC's huge power consumption.
Yes we are polluting the planet, we are killing it in fact. But that doesnt mean that BTC or any cryptocurrency has to let everything stay the same. Why dont smart developers do some research and development on other mining algorithms that lessens the power consumption but maintaining the same security? Ludicrous Headlines About Bitcoin Mining Will Kill Us All (https://news.bitcoin.com/ludicrous-headlines-bitcoin-mining-will-kill-us/)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: rico666 on December 15, 2017, 04:24:59 PM I found another article trying to defend BTC's huge power consumption. Yes we are polluting the planet, we are killing it in fact. But that doesnt mean that BTC or any cryptocurrency has to let everything stay the same. Why dont smart developers do some research and development on other mining algorithms that lessens the power consumption but maintaining the same security? Ludicrous Headlines About Bitcoin Mining Will Kill Us All (https://news.bitcoin.com/ludicrous-headlines-bitcoin-mining-will-kill-us/)
1st german "state TV": https://boerse.ard.de/boersenwissen/boersenwissen-fuer-fortgeschrittene/umweltsuender-bitcoin102.html Google Translate says Quote ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY ALTERNATIVES TO THE BITCOIN Some mining farms now rely on electricity from renewable sources such as hydropower, the so-called "green mining". This is praiseworthy from an environmental point of view, but does not change the immense energy demand of Bitcoin. The Burstcoin based unlike the Bitcoin not on the provided computing power of the miners, but on free hard disk space. While the Bitcoin network currently requires just under 280 kilowatt-hours of electricity per transaction, Burstcoin consumes only 0.5. When you mine the Burstcoin, the computer does not use more power than it does during normal operation. And as soon as a new block of the burst blockchain has been found, the space of the miner is free again. Very similar to the Burstcoin is the Chia-Coin. Again, it depends on the free hard disk space and not on additional computing power. However, chia coins can not yet be gemined. Only at the end of 2018 is the start of the new eco-coin planned. In addition, the miners are no longer miners, but farmers. But: These are relatively small projects that have not yet established themselves on the market. And that's exactly where there are risks. And I would like to add, that even the burstcoin.ist - a site where one could assume a pro-Burst bias, does not speak of 280 kWh versus 0.5kWh, but 195 kWh vs. 0.5 kWh per tx. https://www.burstcoin.ist/2017/09/22/how-burst-puts-bitcoin-to-shame/ Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: pinkflower on December 22, 2017, 02:38:35 AM A small reminder that the energy our planet produces is limited. It is time for a new mining algorithm. A time for Proof of Capacity.
We know its not perfect but with your support, Burst can be better, more efficient and greener than it is today. The Proof of Capacity Consortium has invested a lot of their resources into the project. Lets show our appreciation by downloading Burst, trying it, and post what you hate aboutit , post suggestions on how to improve it, criticize it. Its the only way to improve. Having said all that. Dont buy Burst, its risky. But do try it. Bitcoin's sky-rocketing energy use is a viral story. (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/12/21/bitcoins-sky-rocketing-energy-use-viral-story-we-checked-math/972485001/)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity [China shutting down BTC mining!] Post by: pinkflower on January 09, 2018, 03:12:21 AM How long would it take for us to really be concious that BTC mining is not sustainable? The BTC Asic producers and Chinese miners which really is a cartel has become so powerful that if they are stopped, almost all mining will be stopped. The centralization of BTC mining has become a weakness and I hope all of you understand the situation fully. It will fail unless BTC changes its mining algorithm to oblige CPU or GPU mining again. But that still burns too much electricity.
Having that said, invest in the future, invest in Proof of Capacity. China To 'Shut Down Three-Quarters Of The World's Bitcoin Mining Network' (http://www.ladbible.com/news/technology-news-china-to-shut-down-three-quarters-of-worlds-bitcoin-mining-network-20180108)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity [China shutting down BTC mining!] Post by: pinkflower on January 12, 2018, 03:40:39 AM I know BTC users will argue that mining uses less electricity than the whole banking industry. But thats not the point. The point is Proof of Work mining is still wasteful and its having an negative impact on our environment.
Proof of Capacity and HDD mining which use less energy is the future of cryptocurrency mining. Everyone has to start accepting that fact. Bitcoin Consumes 30 Times More Electricity than Tesla Cars (http://fortune.com/2018/01/11/bitcoin-mining-tesla-electricity/)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity [China shutting down BTC mining!] Post by: pinkflower on January 16, 2018, 02:36:29 AM I call upon you again to support Burst and Proof of Capacity for a more sustainable cryptocurrency future. I love BTC, but we have to face the reality that Proof of Work mining is not sustainable for a greener, more healthy environment.
You dont have to buy and hold millions, or you dont have to buy Burst at all. But I ask, make everyone, especially developers, more aware that Proof of Capacity is here and worth working and researching into as an alternative. Opinion: How Bitcoin works, and why it’s a menace (https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/01/15/opinion-how-bitcoin-works-and-why-its-a-menace/)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity [PoC will be the next evolution of PoW] Post by: pinkflower on January 17, 2018, 02:37:07 AM Why do I keep rallying for Burst and Proof of Capacity? Because it matters.
Why do I think it matters? Because saving the environment matters and we should not add further damage to it. What else? Because the crackdown on BTC miners has started in China and wasteful use of electricity is one of the reasons for it, and it will become the main reason on why every country's government will start going after it. Final words? We need to show them that there is a more efficient, cheaper and a more distributed way to secure blockchains. Support me in rallying for Burst and PoC. Ty. Proof-of-Capacity, The Green Alternative? (https://medium.com/@aclaytonscott/burst-part-3-proof-of-capacity-the-green-alternative-8e2651211671)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity [PoC will be the greener evolution of PoW] Post by: pinkflower on January 22, 2018, 03:18:29 AM Let me begin by showing you this quote from a miner who says that we are failing in looking at the big picture.
Quote “Labeling Bitcoin mining as a ‘waste’ is a failure to look at the big picture,” Marc Bevand, a miner and analyst Is that his argument? But how big is his "picture"? Because my big picture is the Earth, and how we as a species are collectively trying to destroy it. For what? Tokens, digital gold, riches, wealth. I am not trying to tell you to stop supporting BTC, but all of you should start supporting Proof of Capacity as an alternative instead of supporting the other PoW planet killers. There Is Nothing Virtual About Bitcoin’s Energy Appetite (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/21/technology/bitcoin-mining-energy-consumption.html)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity [PoC will be the greener evolution of PoW] Post by: pinkflower on February 05, 2018, 03:21:26 AM This is the time to be aware of what Proof of Work cryptocurrencies are doing to our planet. I know there are some developers who are asking "what alternative is there". Proof of Capacity is there. Dont you see?
If you think it is not secure or there are flaws in it, then help the Burst developers figure out how to fix them for the sake of the environment. Anyhow, you will all fathom the folly of your coins once your kids are suffering from a dying environment. We are starting to see it in the South African drought. Bitcoin, the virtual currency, has become a massive energy hog (https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-02-04/bitcoin-virtual-currency-has-become-massive-energy-hog)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity [The environment is dying in South Africa] Post by: pinkflower on February 11, 2018, 04:44:23 AM It appears that the Chinese mining companies have started moving their interests to Canada. What now? Is that where they start polluting another country with their wasteful use of energy? I have been rallying for Proof of Capacity in the forum for months, but its always been ignored.
Its time to open your eyes people. PoW is not sustainable. China's unwanted bitcoin miners may move to Canada (http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/09/technology/bitcoin-mining-china-canada/index.html) Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on February 18, 2018, 02:15:57 AM In spite that I disagree with some of the concerns in this article, the main message is fair and honest. The energy consumption in BTC mining simply is not sustainable.
I know. I sound like a broken record lol. Bitcoin gobbles up clean energy — just when the real world needs it most (https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-gobbles-up-clean-energy-just-when-the-real-world-needs-it-most/) If there was a failure in BTC's system, its the arrival of Asics. You all know this be true, but you still continue to look the other way. Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity [PoC will be the next evolution of PoW] Post by: d5000 on February 24, 2018, 08:00:33 PM First, I'm also a Burst supporter - because I see a high potential in the Proof-of-Capacity technology. But I would like to see the sources for the assumption that a Burst transaction consumes 1/500 of a Bitcoin TX like you say in this article:
Proof-of-Capacity, The Green Alternative? (https://medium.com/@aclaytonscott/burst-part-3-proof-of-capacity-the-green-alternative-8e2651211671) If it's based on the current power consumption of Burst's PoC in relation to Bitcoin's PoW mining, it is a bit simplifying things, because Burst is also much less secure than Bitcoin (it costs much less to attack it). In all cryptocurrencies, validators (e.g. miners) have a "cost" to protect their coin from attacks that determines its security. The security of the coin depends on a variable I would call "attack cost" - the cost it takes you to carry out a 51% attack. This attack cost is approximately half of the total validators' cost. The "total validators' cost" is made up of two big parts: - hardware costs - electricity costs to run the hardware and do the "hashing" work In Bitcoin, the proportion of hardware costs is a little bit lower than that of electricity costs. In Burst, instead, hardware costs are much higher than electricity costs. We can even say the electricity cost to run a Burst minter is negligible compared to the (it should be less than 10% of the hardware cost, per month). Based on rough estimations one can say that if Bitcoin and Burst had a similar security level - and thus similar validators' costs - then this cost in Bitcoin consists of 40% hardware and 60% electricity costs, while in Burst, it's 90% hardware and 10% electricity. Now, the production of hardware (HDDs/SSDs) does also consume energy. Here it becomes interesting. How much of the "hardware costs" are "hidden electricity costs" - electricity used when the hardware was produced? I would like to see a study or (serious) calculation about that relation. I assume that, as the "electricity cost used in production" should be only a relatively small part of the total hardware costs, the total electricity cost for a similar security level is significantly lower in Burst than in Bitcoin. But I doubt that the relation really is as low as 0,2% (1/500). Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on February 26, 2018, 01:54:35 AM But hard drive production doesnt add to the electricity costs in relation to Burst mining because they are already produced by companies for the current demand. Bitcoin miner production are is something of a new industry that added to the world's electricity use, side by side with the electricity use in the production of GPU and CPU.
But you are also right. I would like to see that study. Title: Re: A case for Burst's proof of capacity Post by: Maian on February 26, 2018, 01:59:50 AM I think that is impossible. However if that is true then people will lose faith in bitcoin because the transaction fee will surely become high. People will forget bitcoin and they will invest in altcoin instead of bitcoin. Yes your right, the people will fucos because of that transaction fee, Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: Ix on February 26, 2018, 02:03:10 AM But hard drive production doesnt add to the electricity costs in relation to Burst mining because they are already produced by companies for the current demand. GPU manufacturers can't even keep up with demand because so many people are buying cards to mine. Hard drive manufacturers would likely run into the same problem should proof of capacity become the norm. Petabytes of storage being "burned" rather than used for other activity means that the manufacturing of those drives should be taken into account. Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: d5000 on February 26, 2018, 03:18:31 AM But hard drive production doesnt add to the electricity costs in relation to Burst mining because they are already produced by companies for the current demand. Bitcoin miner production are is something of a new industry that added to the world's electricity use, side by side with the electricity use in the production of GPU and CPU. Ix was faster, I was about to post about the same. The problem is that we don't have experiences with a mature "Proof of Capacity industry", and thus can only roughly estimate the real energy use.But where proof-of-capacity has an advantage over standard proof-of-work is the cost structure of the security. While HDDs are also "burnt" while doing PoC minting because their lifetime is limited, this process is much slower than the "burning" of electricity. Also, miner hardware gets outdated very fast, while HDDs can be used during more time - and if they are outdated and still work they still can be used for some purposes. From the price of an HDD, I estimate that 10% or less are caused by energy consumption during production. Unfortunately there is very few material available on the web about HDD production. As an HDD can be described as a specialized electric motor, an estimation that production energy waste makes up about 1% of the carbon footprint of an electric motor during its entire life cycle (99% are used in the the "use phase") could well be true for HDDs. In this little presentation (https://sp.ts.fujitsu.com/dmsp/Publications/public/ps-Carbon-Footprinting-of-IT-Products.pdf) analyzing the carbon footprint of an entire computer, hard disks are not even mentioned (mainboard and GPU production seems to be much more energy intensive). As a conclusion, I would not be surprised that a proof-of-capacity coin can achieve a similar security level than a proof-of-work coin with less than 5% of the carbon footprint. But as I wrote, a detailed study would be needed to convince the skeptics. Edit: Just read this article (https://www.burstcoin.ist/2017/06/20/why-proof-of-capacity-should-be-taken-seriously-2015-reprint-part-2/), and the calculation at the bottom may be already pretty good (~3% energy "waste" compared to BTC) although it doesn't take into account the waste from HDD production. Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on February 27, 2018, 02:57:05 AM But hard drive production doesnt add to the electricity costs in relation to Burst mining because they are already produced by companies for the current demand. GPU manufacturers can't even keep up with demand because so many people are buying cards to mine. Hard drive manufacturers would likely run into the same problem should proof of capacity become the norm. Petabytes of storage being "burned" rather than used for other activity means that the manufacturing of those drives should be taken into account. Then we will get to that problem and crunch the numbers when we get there. As of today, there is so much supply of hard drives that the demand is not that much to increase the prices. With that said, once PoC3 is released that petabytes of storage "being burned" in Burst will be put to good use.
Taken from What is The Dymaxion? (https://www.burst-coin.org/the-dymaxion). Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: d5000 on March 01, 2018, 04:41:39 AM With that said, once PoC3 is released that petabytes of storage "being burned" in Burst will be put to good use. While I applaud this decision (and I'm eager to know how the challenges are solved), this feature would also have a side effect: it would increase mining participation because apart from rewards, mining then would provide an "useful" service (data hosting) and thus "additional value". This would mean that energy consumption would go up. But in my opinion the efficiency of the complete system would increase, because while there's more energy consumption there is less "useless energy consumption".
Taken from What is The Dymaxion? (https://www.burst-coin.org/the-dymaxion). I think it was Paul Sztorc who first has analyzed this topic in his well-known article Nothing is cheaper than Proof of Work (http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/) - well, he analyzed "useful mining" (like heating with mining hardware) but the conclusion can be applied to "useful Proof of Capacity", too. I agree with him in this case, not so much with the rest of the conclusions he draws in the article (for me, energy efficiency is an advantage). Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on March 13, 2018, 02:54:07 AM This may be taken as good news for miners but it should also serve as a warning. Its now visible to the EU that proof of work mining should be controlled and to quote the article "that it is subject to EU rules regarding energy efficiency, the power sector and greenhouse gases emissions."
Proof of Capacity is the future of mining or will be, at the minimum, be a big part of it. EU Can't Ban Bitcoin Mining Over Energy Concerns, Official Says (https://www.coindesk.com/eu-cant-ban-bitcoin-mining-over-energy-concerns-official-says/) Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on March 23, 2018, 03:52:03 AM A surprising blog from none other than Minergate, one of the largest mining pools around! This doesnt mean that they will become a Burst mining pool anytime soon, but its good that they researched about PoC and its advantages over PoW and PoS.
Why Proof-of-capacity could be the future of cryptocurrency (https://minergate.com/blog/why-proof-of-capacity-could-be-the-future-of-cryptocurrency/)
Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on April 26, 2018, 04:45:19 AM Are there Chinese miners running an ASIC mining farm in the forum? Its a good time to start learning more about Burst and Proof of Capacity as a more sustainable way to mine coins.
Some of you must know deeply within yourselves that mining with hard drives, with Proof of Space, Proof of Space and Time, or Proof of Capacity is the future. China Continues Bitcoin Mining Crackdown by Seizing 600 Computers (https://www.newsbtc.com/2018/04/25/china-continues-bitcoin-mining-crackdown-seizing-600-computers/) Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on May 18, 2018, 04:23:33 AM Another article on the wasteful use of energy in BTC's PoW mining algorithm. Bitcoin purists will find some reasons to justify PoW's wastefulness. What they should be doing is find other alternatives for PoW.
Burst and PoC might not be the answer for them, but it plotted the way to find the answer. New study quantifies bitcoin’s ludicrous energy consumption (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/05/new-study-quantifies-bitcoins-ludicrous-energy-consumption/) Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on May 19, 2018, 02:44:39 AM A writer from newsbtc.com, called JPBuntix, wrote this opinion piece (https://www.newsbtc.com/2018/05/18/study-claims-bitcoins-energy-consumption/) to refute the assertion that PoW mining of BTC is wasteful. But his argument is weak. He did not tell us the fact that electricity is a finite resource. That is why big corporate miners move from country to country like parasites for mining profits.
Another idea he suggested is renewable energy. JPBuntix did not tell us that the cheapest way to generate electricity is by burning fossil fuels. What corporate miner is using 100% renewable energy? Proof of Work is the best to secure blockchains, but it will not be sustainable. Title: Re: A case for Burst's Proof Of Capacity Post by: pinkflower on May 28, 2018, 03:26:36 AM This is another news of the complaints from local residents of an area where BTC Proof of Work mining is starting to stress their power grids. When will this community realize that PoW mining is not sustainable?
But its best to let them keep making the same mistakes. All of you know where Burst (https://www.burst-coin.org/) is when that time comes. Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ suck up electricity, stress power grids in Central Washington (https://www.seattletimes.com/business/bitcoin-backlash-as-miners-suck-up-electricity-stress-power-grids-in-central-washington/) |