Priceless data:: An Order-of-Magnitude Estimate of the Relative Sustainability of the Bitcoin Network pic.twitter.com/dGBsXqzXPp
I disagree with the "emission trend: decreasing" for bitcoin. Ok, in the very long run this is true, but if bitcoin will pick up like most of us here think it will, then the BTC price will go up a lot, and so will mining investment/electricity consumption. Every reward halving should cut that in two though. it's quite possible that hashrate is leading a price explosion, however. we are oversecured. it's been relentlessly going up for over years now and imo is a leading indicator. |
|
|
|
Conclusion
As can be conclusively seen, the relative impact of the Bitcoin network does not even register on the radar of the fiat and gold-based monetary systems, representing a very conservative relative environmental impact of 0.11%, and a relative economic impact of 0.275%. There are no negative social externalities as a result of Bitcoin proliferation, and any money laundering and shadow economy dealings that currently happen on the network will reduce drastically in proportion as adoption grows and regulations firm up on the on-and-off ramps into the Bitcoin economy. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and the crypto-currency space will take time to evolve to ensure that the issues faced and created by our legacy monetary systems do not continue to plague us for the next century and beyond.
Although this paper has shied away from all of the ideological and philosophical debates surrounding Bitcoin, what is clear is that the argument that Bitcoin is superior monetary system – from the benefits and protections it provides to merchants and consumers, to the relative lack of negative impact it has on our planet and humanity in general – is a strong one.
The world is currently crippled by several issues, and the human race faces several existential threats such as climate change, the global ageing population demographic crisis and wealth and income inequality. It is also unacceptable in 2014 to still have tens of millions of people forced into labour, and current monetary systems are somewhat responsible for several of the social ills brought about by corruption, money laundering and the black market.
For those who are willing to back their principles and morals with their money, Bitcoin provides the opportunity for socially, environmentally and economically conscious global citizens to choose to no longer participate in the fragile and rotten legacy monetary system, and voluntarily participate in the open and wondrous Bitcoin ecosystem. Due to the several benefits and significantly reduced burden on our planet and society, there is a certain feeling of inevitability about digital currencies, whether it be Bitcoin, or a future currency that proves to be even more sustainable and beneficial for humanity.http://www.scribd.com/doc/228253109/The-Relative-Sustainability-of-the-Bitcoin-Network-by-Hass-McCook
|
|
|
|
remember that video on Tim Geithner a coupla weeks back? well, here's more: Geithner also misleads the reader about the single most important moment of the crisis: when Goldman got bailed out through Federal Reserve loans to AIG. This mattered because it was when the public really began taking over the debts of the financial system, and it’s well documented in the Congressional Oversight Report of June 2010. When AIG was on the verge of going under, exposing every big bank that had bought insurance from them, Geithner had a choice. He could force big banks to share the losses or just bail them out. He chose the bailout. Rather than forcing Goldman and JP Morgan to share in AIG’s loss, to which they were heavily exposed, Geithner took 100 percent of the liability on the New York Fed’s balance sheet. Then, in November of 2008, the Fed bought back underlying securities from Goldman, at par, despite their trading at 50 cents on the dollar. This was a massive funneling of resources to Goldman in particular.http://www.vice.com/read/tim-geithner-and-the-con-artist-wing-of-the-democratic-party |
|
|
|
Priceless data:: An Order-of-Magnitude Estimate of the Relative Sustainability of the Bitcoin Network pic.twitter.com/dGBsXqzXPp  |
|
|
|
don't forget bail-ins.
and then pension raids.
those will be coming too. all in the name of propping up debt based speculative investments.
Just the thought of this makes me so bullish on bitcoin that I can't see straight. The eBay/paypal news is nothing compared to what the Europeans are about to pull  so true. |
|
|
|
|
don't forget bail-ins.
and then pension raids.
those will be coming too. all in the name of propping up debt based speculative investments.
|
|
|
|
|
after reading thru the comments, i still believe sticking to the original idea of no time limits to claiming spin off coins is most appropriate.
1. as others have pointed out, there are a lot of physical bitcoins out there that ppl will be unwilling to crack open to sign for spin off coins. if this happens, it is a statement that, on balance, those ppl do not believe enough in the spin off to go to the trouble of claiming their spin off coins which will decrease its legitimacy and chances for success. let's face it; spin offs should ideally only be applied to alt schemes that actually do have a chance for success. and if a dev goes to the trouble of creating the spin off, everyone involved including the Bitcoin holders who will be receiving distributed coins, will want the spin off to blossom as it will increase their wealth. thus, anyone not claiming spin off coins are in essence saying no. if they do bother to crack their physical bitcoins open (i won't be), this exposes them to theft, their location, and deanonymization, which is also not good. some ppl have their paper wallets or physical bitcoins scattered in places all over the world. quite an inconvenience for them if they want to claim their spin offs.
2. no matter how much advertising you do, there will inevitably be ppl who don't hear about the time limit and may come back years later crying foul after having come out of a coma or some such excuse.
3. i'm also worried about the effects on Satoshi himself. you are in effect forcing him to make a choice; stay anonymous or become public. as i said above, if he stays anonymous and fails to claim his spin off coins, that could be a big statement in his not believing in the spin off which could have unpredictable effects on its value (one can't assume greater value just b/c he fails to claim his spin offs). or, he might be dead. or he might not have heard of it. as of today, we don't know what has happened to him and the market has priced this in and accepted it. if he does claim his spin offs, immediately everyone will know he is alive and well and might infer he is greedy. what blow back effects will that have on Bitcoin itself? if he is deemed greedy, then ppl might conclude that he may well in fact dump his bitcoins in the near future, as well as the spin off coin. otoh, maybe it will signal his belief in a particular spin off and its merit. most importantly, if he does claim his portion of the spin off, i believe his physical security might be put in danger as he might inadvertantly reveal his location or identity.
4. as smooth said, all these redistributive proposals have to be recognized for what they are.
5. you can claim that as long as you make everyone aware of a time limit at the beginning it is fair and that would be true. but that misses the point that all present day uncertainty and perceived unfairness in Bitcoin is currently built into the blockchain.
the point is we don't know what type of market effects these different scenarios will have; which is why wanted to neutralize them by assuming all uncertainty is encoded into the initial distribution of the blockchain and that they would be seamlessly transferred to a promising spin off.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is nothing
then why do you spend so much time here trolling? unless your time is worth nothing. |
|
|
|
|
Gold Collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
|
|
|
|
|
You have no idea how high we can push this.
|
|
|
|
obviously, but 10:1 you're net short otherwise you wouldn't be getting so angry at a Bull like me who keeps messing up your grand plans.
What "grand plans" do I have that you don't, exactly? I'm not angry at anyone. Your predictions are fine, I'm only showing the hypocrisy of your position: If you care about the price rising, you care about making money on your investment. If you care about making money, you shouldn't care about making it on the way up, or on the way down. You have always been the "childish" speculator you so deride. hey, read what you write. you're the one who started the childish personal attacks. not me. all i've done is state the bullish case and stuck to it. you can't handle it. Pretty sure I've been telling you why you're a hypocrite with your "short-seller attacks," and you've come back with nothing of substance. I just wanted to document this for everyone else. If you don't want it public, feel free to edit your posts. I'm bored proving your anti-short position wrong. whatever happened to that BitMagic idiot anyways? there's so many in this thread. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
