EU proof of work ban (Bitcoin)

[Odusko]

I believe this topic belong more on the BTC discussion board than Bitcoin mining board:
As the world looks toward a reduction in electricity demands and consumption EU government is presently set to regulate Bitcoin/cryptocurrency operations within its region and one among the list of things to be voted on although now removed from Monday voting was the ban of proof of work POW (which have a long history of trust but high energy consumption) to be replaced with proof of stake (POS) am excited and at the same time confused on the future of Bitcoin mining and it operates in the EU, but thank goodness the vote on the ban on the proof of work blockchain mode of operation has been dropped, so that is the EU Parliament will not vote on it by Monday. As the EU considered moving from proof of work blockchain consensus (POW) to a more flexible and eco-friendly proof of stake (POS) it will have a direct negative impact on bitcoin mining which runs on the proof of work algorithm.
Will bitcoin scalability reduce the rate of energy consumption in the future to have an edge of parliament decisions in such a direction just like Bitcoin's anti-inflation mechanism
further reading

[zeuner]

I believe this topic belong more on the BTC discussion board than Bitcoin mining board:

I think it belongs to the politics board.

As the world looks toward a reduction in electricity demands and consumption EU government is presently set to regulate Bitcoin/cryptocurrency operations within its region and one among the list of things to be voted on although now removed from Monday voting was the ban of proof of work POW (which have a long history of trust but high energy consumption) to be replaced with proof of stake (POS) am excited and at the same time confused on the future of Bitcoin mining and it operates in the EU, but thank goodness the vote on the ban on the proof of work blockchain mode of operation has been dropped, so that is the EU Parliament will not vote on it by Monday. As the EU considered moving from proof of work blockchain consensus (POW) to a more flexible and eco-friendly proof of stake (POS) it will have a direct negative impact on bitcoin mining which runs on the proof of work algorithm.
Will bitcoin scalability reduce the rate of energy consumption in the future to have an edge of parliament decisions in such a direction just like Bitcoin's anti-inflation mechanism
further reading

POS doesn't easily solve the nothing-at-stake problem.

I think it's dangerous to decide upon cryptographic algorithm choices by political decree.

A more proper way would be to tax the electricity used for mining.

[DooMAD]

Sounds like it's been blown out of proportion.  See the following posts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5387079.msg59363270#msg59363270

and

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5387079.msg59359366#msg59359366

I think it's dangerous to decide upon cryptographic algorithm choices by political decree.

They can't change the algorithm.  Don't believe the clickbait foolishness.  Bitcoin isn't switching to Proof of Stake or any other such nonsense.  

[Upgrade00]

Will bitcoin scalability reduce the rate of energy consumption in the future to have an edge of parliament decisions in such a direction just like Bitcoin's anti-inflation mechanism

The headline is being milked by the media for views and clicks, and the idea of bitcoin contributing to climate change and the energy consumption being detrimental is something that has for a long time been blown out of proportion a lot and does not reflect the reality.
There is no extensive damage caused by bitcoins usage and consequently there is no issue that needs to be fixed.

[Odusko]

Will bitcoin scalability reduce the rate of energy consumption in the future to have an edge of parliament decisions in such a direction just like Bitcoin's anti-inflation mechanism

The headline is being milked by the media for views and clicks, and the idea of bitcoin contributing to climate change and the energy consumption being detrimental is something that has for a long time been blown out of proportion a lot and does not reflect the reality.
There is no extensive damage caused by bitcoins usage and consequently, there is no issue that needs to be fixed.

The media have thrown things out of proportion truly as the anti-Bitcoin campaign range around the world, media have always been a tool of the government and will only give out the title to caption the attention of the people to influence the decisions.

[Easteregg69]

Switch to wrap.

tBTC. is selfcompounding. You can even get it with a twist you see.

It's on Fantom. 1 tBTC is equal to 1.0232673 BTC at time of writing. TRX also has BTC wrap. POS.


I know. Don't mess with your sense of immutable.

[darkangel11]

I've read about it and at first they wanted to ban PoW mining but the resistance was so big with many politicians speaking against that they changed the proposed law into this strange form which says that coins are supposed to switch to PoS to save energy. This is so stupid and there are already politicians speaking against it, saying that while the US is embracing cryptocurrencies the EU wants to be left behind and scare investors away from the region.

Bitcoin will never switch to PoS because it can't. People who wrote this law don't know anything about how bitcoin works. You can't force a decentralized currency to change its code because eco terrorists demand it.

[Easteregg69]

Check the fomo level now.  

1 tBTC equals 1.0232691 now. Compounding.

[coupable]

It's stupid if they think they can change the algorithm to POS. This is the most stupid thing i saw for this year Lol
Or it's an introduction to ban mining activities as the law will have a focus discuss in both bitcoin and electrum.

Switch to wrap.

tBTC. is selfcompounding. You can even get it with a twist you see.

It's on Fantom. 1 tBTC is equal to 1.0232673 BTC at time of writing. TRX also has BTC wrap. POS.


I know. Don't mess with your sense of immutable.

The blockchain is immutable and we know it's not a matter of a politic decision to change the algorithm from POS to POW.
I can't understand what are you really about to post here. Is the news affecting the hashrate of bitcoin? And why you mention TRX with POS?

[DapanasFruit]

Will bitcoin scalability reduce the rate of energy consumption in the future to have an edge of parliament decisions in such a direction just like Bitcoin's anti-inflation mechanism

The headline is being milked by the media for views and clicks, and the idea of bitcoin contributing to climate change and the energy consumption being detrimental is something that has for a long time been blown out of proportion a lot and does not reflect the reality.
There is no extensive damage caused by bitcoins usage and consequently there is no issue that needs to be fixed.

Certainly, there are some people who are so consumed with their supposedly green agenda that they took a big ride with the popularity of Bitcoin just to stay relevant and so they can offer something - just like a cause - to their followers and minions. While we should admit that maybe in the past years, there had been some issues - though not as big as these people would like us to believe - that must be ironed out, things are getting to be different these days as a growing percentage of Bitcoin mining are now into renewable energy. The idea that just because an industry is consuming a big load of power must be detrimental to the environment does not hold a lot of water at all because so many other industries are having the same thing so why put the limelight on Bitcoin alone? There is a big problem not with Bitcoin but the mindset of the fake green agenda. I am hoping then that EU will not be that stupid to ban POW which is what Bitcoin is based on.

[pooya87]

Regardless of what you think about PoW and whether you want to accept that it is not at all wasting any energy, the solution is not to change it to something insecure and seriously flawed called PoS. It would be like saying I don't like this food that the chef in this 5 star restaurant prepared so I'm going to each dog shit instead!

I already said it in the other topic too, EU has fallen for the same FUD that China fell for. They think they can solve their worsening energy crisis by banning something that is not even consuming 0.01% of their total energy (it may be a lot less in EU since the cost is already high in most part of it).
In short, they would have still struggled to keep the lights on even if bitcoin never existed.

~

Stop trolling

[hd49728]

I already said it in the other topic too, EU has fallen for the same FUD that China fell for. They think they can solve their worsening energy crisis by banning something that is not even consuming 0.01% of their total energy (it may be a lot less in EU since the cost is already high in most part of it).
In short, they would have still struggled to keep the lights on even if bitcoin never existed.

The report from Bitcoin Mining Council shows this fact. Bitcoin mining industry has better percent of sustainable power it used for mining. Better than the whole EU or many big countries. Furthermore, the primary energy consumption from Bitcoin mining is very low vs many countries.

It's a fud that is bad and inaccurate.

Full report https://bitcoinminingcouncil.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2022.01.18-BMC-Q4-2021.pdf

[Ozero]

Earlier, information appeared that the countries of the European Union want to ban the mining and circulation of cryptocurrencies that use the energy-intensive PoW algorithm from 2025. There is a problem and it is not worth brushing it aside.
At the last G20 summit, states pledged to take action against global climate change, including combating greenhouse gas emissions. It is much easier for states to start this fight by banning the mining of cryptocurrencies that use the PoW algorithm than to destroy or significantly rebuild industries in their economies. Therefore, it is quite possible that such mining will be banned. Bitcoin needs to be prepared for this.

[Leviathan.007]

That's not new, Europe and some other countries are worried about the energy consumption so they will make some decisions about mining bitcoin and any other coin which is pow, some countries including mine will usually take an extra fee for the electricity price if they recognize the miner, also takin extra tax from miners could be another option to cover the power consumption, but regardless of the energy consumption, they believe the miners will increased greenhouse gases if they use the fossil fuels to provide the electricity, so according to many articles mining will be suspended on many countries in Europe.

[Odusko]

That's not new, Europe and some other countries are worried about the energy consumption so they will make some decisions about mining bitcoin and any other coin which is pow, some countries including mine will usually take an extra fee for the electricity price if they recognize the miner, also takin extra tax from miners could be another option to cover the power consumption, but regardless of the energy consumption, they believe the miners will increased greenhouse gases if they use the fossil fuels to provide the electricity, so according to many articles mining will be suspended on many countries in Europe.

Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations, this is why most countries are now looking forward to proof of stake instead of proof of work but our concerns are what implication will this have on Bitcoin mining.
 

[DooMAD]

this is why most countries are now looking forward to proof of stake instead of proof of work

They can look forward to anything they want.  Doesn't mean they're going to get it.  Anyone who thinks they can force change in a system they don't understand should prepare for disappointment.  We make the rules here, not them.

[zeuner]

They can't change the algorithm.

Anyone can start a PoS fork and watch it fail...

[BlackHatCoiner]

Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations

Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked.

[Fundamentals Of]

Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations

Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked.

There must be some truth in the environmental impact of Bitcoin. Nobody should be denying that. Bitcoin eats up a lot of energy. That is also true. But by emphasizing Bitcoin, it seems the critics and so called environmental advocates are pointing their fingers only at Bitcoin. Why is that? Why is Bitcoin being singled out when the environment is currently destroyed by so many human activities, most of them unnecessary? These Bitcoin critics are obviously biased against Bitcoin. Bitcoin's contribution to global warming is much lower than fiat's.

[DanWalker]

Bitcoin mining energy consumption has been the topic of discussion in many countries around the world and not only the energy being consumed for mining but also the environmental impact of mining operations

Have they taken a look on the energy consumed by fiat money? No, because it's not favoring them. As I've recently said, it's a matter of control, not ethics or economic damage. What is being said about the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is pure propaganda that is easily sucked.

There must be some truth in the environmental impact of Bitcoin. Nobody should be denying that. Bitcoin eats up a lot of energy. That is also true. But by emphasizing Bitcoin, it seems the critics and so called environmental advocates are pointing their fingers only at Bitcoin. Why is that? Why is Bitcoin being singled out when the environment is currently destroyed by so many human activities, most of them unnecessary? These Bitcoin critics are obviously biased against Bitcoin. Bitcoin's contribution to global warming is much lower than fiat's.

It's all just an excuse of bitcoin haters, bitcoin mining consumes energy and produces a certain amount of emissions but compared to other mining industries it's just a negligible amount. Global warming is the result of the development of science, the deep intervention of man in nature.
It's greats that the ban was not passed, would be a slap in the face to those who have always been prejudiced against bitcoin.