GREENPEACE INTENSIFIES CAMPAIGN AGAINST BITCOIN FOLLOWING ETHEREUM'S MERGE

[pooya87]

however the CFTF does have this power.this caused ethereum to push ethereum over to PoS because yes ethereum was classed as a commodity

I disagree because the plan to leave PoW behind wasn't created yesterday in this shitcoin. In fact from the early days that it was released the "difficulty bomb" was part of the ETH protocol that ensured PoW doesn't remain the protocol forever.
It's just that ethereum developers were too incompetent to finish the code to make the switch so it took a long time needing multiple hard forks to postpone the "difficulty bomb" many times.

[1715315669]

1715315669

[1715315669]

1715315669

[1715315669]

1715315669

[Xylber]

Don't be naive, it has nothing to do with the environtment, they are attacking bitcoin because bankers are greenpeace donors.

[franky1]

however the CFTC does have this power.this caused ethereum to push ethereum over to PoS because yes ethereum was classed as a commodity

I disagree because the plan to leave PoW behind wasn't created yesterday in this shitcoin. In fact from the early days that it was released the "difficulty bomb" was part of the ETH protocol that ensured PoW doesn't remain the protocol forever.
It's just that ethereum developers were too incompetent to finish the code to make the switch so it took a long time needing multiple hard forks to postpone the "difficulty bomb" many times.

ethereum was not classed as a commodity yesterday either

ethereum has been thought of as a commodity since its inception, and the CFTC has been poking at ethereum for years
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/cftc-says-cryptocurrency-ether-is-a-commodity-and-is-open-to-ether-derivatives-133455545.html
(2019)

bitcoin supporters lobbied against this. which is where instead of CFTC , the SEC stepped in. treating bitcoin as a asset. not commodity.. but this year SEC wants to step out and hand the work over to CFTC

the point of etherem was to be a network used to create other tokens(on sidechains/subnets) ..
yep a commodity is a raw material used to create other products.
ethereum were happy as a commodity


the attempts to postpone it were not from the regulated exchanges.. it was from the users that were not regulated. and those who were regulated but wanted a safe transition

..
but in short. with bitcoin not being a commodity in US legal recognised jurisdiction..CFTC does not apply.. thus CFTC regulators cannot push exchanges to push developers to shift to PoS due to things that the CFTC impose on exchanges else risk having to delist crypto's that dont fir CFTC acceptable parameters

however if bitcoin is recognised as a commodity.. CFTC regulation powers can apply(production quota's, environmental inspections.. think of all the things that agri-farmers have to obide by and limit their ability to operate/grow.. yep that CFTC stuff)

and yes for assets.. there is a regulatory reason why many exchanges do not accept LN/liquid/monero due to those being redflag currencies according to FATF/SEC under their jurisdiction of currency/asset

dont worry about the greenpace sideshow stage drama.. thats just the distraction finger point to "dont look at gov, blame greenpeace" and distract people away from whats really happening..
the SEC is trying to shift bitcoin out of SEC jurisdiction and into CFTC jurisdiction this year... ethereum was in CFTCjurisdiction for years

understand the implications of this jurisdictional shift

i tried to dumb things down and not go full wall of text.. but the important thing is

if explaining more complexities as short as possible

the EPA has ultimate environmental impact powers.
the EPA has not much power or sway of things in SEC remit. but it has alot more of a relationship and power to get involved in the CFTC remit

crypto(generally) is just currecny
top regulator (FATF) finactional action task force
sub class regulators
asset/security based crypto (SEC) securities exchange commission

commodity based cryto (CFTC) commodity futures trade commission

[blockman]

Surprised to see that it was Greenpeace. Another agenda to spread and they should even focus more on other things than this. Oh well, they are again into PoW thing that consumes energy. They don't get it, they should campaign against those factories that are spreading their leaked oil in the rivers and not with these machines that can be run with the alternative energy for the miners that own farms of it.

I was surprised too. They could already campaign against the energy expenditure of traditional banking, but no, which makes me think that they are more in cahoots with the powers that be than they like to pretend.

The bad thing about this is that with the climate sensitivity around the world, the message that Bitcoin is a threat to the environment is getting through.

It's more like propaganda, we've been used to this campaign and accusations against bitcoin. Those known people tell that bitcoin consumes that much energy and it should be alternative and green energy that must be used. Even before they tell us that the miners have been doing that, at least not the majority but we can be specific to them that they're already into green energy. Whoever is behind these campaigns is really hitting their business and the fault is bitcoin, so, this is one of their way of pushing people away into bitcoin.

[pooya87]

ethereum was not classed as a commodity yesterday either

In any case their plans to move to another algorithm that would give them free profit for the premined 72 million tokens they hold was there from the start. The definition of their shitcoin inside United States might have only acted as an additional incentive not the cause.

P.S. They're saying on reddit that hippies at greenpeace have received $5 million bribe to spread the FUD about bitcoin. Ripple paid the bribe! https://redd.it/xgkp0z

[Lucius]

Its not just greenpeace. Basically anyone who knows how much power is wasted by mining btc would agree. This forum is a bit of an echo chamber though so doubt my option will hold much sway.

How many TWh are spent annually on Bitcoin mining? How much in comparison will be lost on an annual basis? The main question is where is Bitcoin in this whole problem that you and similar proponents keep highlighting?


For someone who compares Bitcoin to tulips, you don't seem very intelligent?

Sounds like BTC is exactly like Tulips

You are correct, tulips do have some value if you want something pretty in your garden. BTC doesn't, come back in 10 years and see if I'm right

I have a feeling that in 10 years you'll feel pretty stupid when you read your post - along with these geniuses from Greenpeace.

[theskillzdatklls]

I wish they spent money on something more meaningful, not on ads against PoW. Some are fast to attack Bitcoin because they don't like it much, don't understand it, and think they can succeed if they go against it. That's not possible, the consensus to move from PoW to PoS won't be reached.
Climate change is real, but fighting Bitcoin won't stop it or even meaningfully make the problem smaller. There are plenty of other areas where meaningful change is possible and where advocating for change would make more sense.
Also, it would be nice if they did their research to prove that if they succeed, things will actually get better and it won't be that the dirty energy Bitcoin used would immediately get used up by other players, so it won't even make that tiny difference it's supposed to make. And, on the contrary, I've heard interesting arguments that Bitcoin can actually stimulate switch to green energy because it can be what creates demand for it.

This is exactly the issue. First off, I'd argue supporting a currency, with electricity, that divests away from proof of war (the $USD / $EUR / etc), is much better for the planet than not doing so.

But that said, the biggest issue is what you already said, dealing with opportunity cost. Even if they were correct (they aren't), there are things that they could battle against with a much higher saving-the-planet-ROI.

Total nonsense. It's so bad I have to wonder if it's a government co-opted plant.

[NotATether]

you can even make the argument that Bitcoin mining is a positive for the environment. 

Like I said, an echo chamber.

You realize you are on a bitcoin forum, right?

Of course there will be bias when topics like this come up.

Just a week or two ago, there was a thread asking whether "this is the end for cryptocurrency". 50 people voted. Every single one of them voted "No", not a single one "Yes".

[Zlantann]

If the hippies at Greenpeace were so worried about the environment and are as "international" as they claim to be, they should start protesting against all those people who are starting to burn coal or are currently on a cutting spree to destroy the planet by cutting the trees to turn them into firewoods for the winter, all under their nose.

President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen recently raised an alarm that most European nations are losing years of environmental sustainability efforts in a few months because of the shortage of gas. Yes these nations need to ensure that their inhabitants survive this challenging period but they also need to know that Bitcoin has the capacity to positively touch the lives of many, hence it is also very essential.    

But of course all the toxic gases that burning coal releases in the very air people breathe is not important for Greenpeace but trying to turn bitcoin into a centralized shitcoin by switching to PoS is! Well dream on hippies...

Greenpeace is wasting a whole lot of money that could have been used to seek an alternative source of power. There are many nonpowered dams that can be converted to powered dams and most old dams can be remodeled to produce more power.
It is also important to note that Ethereum's switch to PoS is in its experimental stage. In a few months, the challenges and disadvantages of this switch would become evident to all.

[DooMAD]

dont worry about the greenpace sideshow stage drama.. thats just the distraction finger point to "dont look at gov, blame greenpeace" and distract people away from whats really happening..
the SEC is trying to shift bitcoin out of SEC jurisdiction and into CFTC jurisdiction this year... ethereum was in CFTCjurisdiction for years

understand the implications of this jurisdictional shift

Either Bitcoin doesn't have a jurisdiction or it has many thousands of jurisdictions.  I don't see why people constantly get their panties in a twist about the US above all else.  If you aren't an American, they don't hold power over you, so stop treating them as though they do.  Bitcoin is global and this isn't 'Team America: World Police'.  These bureaucratic idiots are over-reaching and don't seem to realise that American influence on the world stage is beginning to wane.  Centralised services, however, do have jurisdictions.  If you use any form of custodial service, then yes, be very concerned if those services are based in the US.  

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

The truth of the matter is that "Greenhouse" need to understand is that a change in the consensus of Bitcoin from PoW to PoS is not the solution to that perfect climate they anticipate for, because we have got many other factors still affecting climate more than the energy emissions used for bitcoin mining, such as burning of fuel, oil and gas, and volcanic eruptions which occurs on a regular basis, because a change of its consensus will actually deviate the true meaning of Bitcoin, which stands for a decentralized and independent digital currency

[JaimeAlejandro]

Climate change is real, but fighting Bitcoin won't stop it or even meaningfully make the problem smaller.

No, “climate change” is not real. Just because the majority is saying so, that doesn't make something to be a scientific truth. We’ve seen this so many times before in history. This is so well documented, that I’m not going to lose my time posting links to what it is and has been obvious since this “climate change” propaganda started.

There’s barely 90 to 100 years of temperature and climate data. The Earth is around 4.5 billion years old. How could anyone get conclusions about any change with 100 years within a data range of 4,5 billion years? Nobody in his right mind would consider such an “study” serious because it is not. There is no data to confirm any “climate change”. There’s no data to link humans to that unconfirmed climate change.

This is just another anthropocentric religion. Another one! I do not discuss other people’s beliefs, but do not call it science. It is a religion. Full Stop.

And when a religion is the State religion, guess what? It will be the means the State will use to justify collecting and stealing money from its citizens, while they bend down their heads and consent.

This is what BTC is about. This the real people’s silent revolution against the State. It has started by blowing up the monetary foundations of this State totalitarian regime and will finish by debunking all the lies the States have been spreading to enslave their citizens (the fiat money system allows them to spend without limits to spread their lies). The “climate change” is one of the biggest.

Look for astrophysicist Pears Corbyn. He’s a scientist! Read or listen to what he’s saying about all this climate change BS. Oh, yes, he’s been already tagged as a “conspiracy theorist”, as probably is my case, Ron Paul’s, Tulsi Gabard’s and anyone who dares to challenge globalist elite falsehoods. Of course, how come not? We are Russian agents, and whatever come to their mains. The typical communist resort of calling anyone against all their nonsense a “fascist” (which the Democrats in the US have adopted recently as their own basic tactic), as much as the Republicans used to call from the 50’s up to the 80’s anyone opposing their warmongering BS as “communists”. Nothing new, so nothing to be surprised.

What's new? These attacks aren't new for Bitcoin. But still, Bitcoin stands strong. It's not possible to move Bitcoin from PoW to PoS. Bitcoin isn't like Ethereum. Because Ethereum has a team who are deciding things and controlling everything as well. But Bitcoin doesn't have a team and miners have to decide. Do you think miners will ever support PoS? I don't think so since they are going to affect it in the first place. Just forget about technical things or how secure PoW is. Miners will never support PoS for Bitcoin.

And the real problem to convert BTC to PoS does not lie in the miners, as they’re just services providers to the nodes (they owners). BTC belongs to anyone or less say, it belongs to everyone who decide to install a full BTC node. It is not possible to move from PoW as it would hamper single normal people to own the very source of their wealth: running a full BTC node. 

PoW is one of the greatest inventions of history. PoS is nothing but the same BS running every single fiat currency, company stock, and so on. There’s no such an invention in PoS. It is just an euphemism for same old legacy BS that’s been running for ages.


[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[franky1]

Either Bitcoin doesn't have a jurisdiction or it has many thousands of jurisdictions.  I don't see why people constantly get their panties in a twist about the US above all else.  If you aren't an American, they don't hold power over you, so stop treating them as though they do.  Bitcoin is global and this isn't 'Team America: World Police'.

says the (dcg sponsored) core dev team fanboy

says the guy that loved core devs(mostly under the umbrella of DCG) ability to mandate an upgrade activation with support from the 2017 NY agreement of economic nodes

says the guy that things core devs should code what they like and if users dont like it they can go play on an altcoin. ..

once you see that DCG is regulated by america. and DCG can pull that same 2017 tactic again. and you see that CFTC are trying to take place over the SEC. thus allowing a new door for the EPA to jump in..
.. you should see the risks of possibility. to be risk aware

anyway its not that CFTC have power of me (bitcoin user but british)
its not power over me
its the big exchanges and merchants (THE ECONOMIC NODES) which are regulated and...
..regulators have power over THEM

YOU KNOW THIS STUFF dont put your amnesia hat on now, dont play dumb and then try hugging your pals back to sleep telling them everything is fine and they dont need to do anything..
you know full well about the NYA and the mandated code event all sponsored and organised by those within the DCG portfolio

and users nodes end up(not much choice) following the chain that the exchanges(economic nodes follow) and merchants decide to accept as BTC. because users want to have their transactions seen on the chain merchants and exchanges follow so that people can buy/sell or swap for fiat with such

as for regulators pushing Devs
again just as DCG did in 2017 with the economic nodes(NYA) DCG also sponsored and demanded their employees(blockstream) to code the mandated upgrade.

yep now its "seems" like there are now 3 teams (brinks, blockstream and chaincodelabs) but under a CFTC regulation, sister with the EPA. bitcoin could have developers regulated to do software updates FOR/on behalf of certain regulated services.  

yep DCG group as a financial portfolio company might get pressure from regulators to push for a PoS "mandated upgrade"
thus re-visiting the tactics of 2017

these tactics are something people need to be aware of and remember.. more so then some social drama of greenpeace

[yazher]

This is the computer versus the typing machine, and old fogeys proposing going back to the typing machine because computers spend energy. Well, you type… I’ll use a computer. Let’s see who wins.

I wonder if there was a campaign against the internet back then and they use the global warming nonsense as they using it against Bitcoin right now. If so, I bet those people are using the internet nowadays and forget about their nonsense because obviously they were getting paid to do it by some companies who will gonna lose their businesses when the internet becomes essential all around the world. I think history will repeat itself when they see there's no way for them to spend their wealth except to buy bitcoins in the future.

[DooMAD]

says the guy that things core devs should code what they like and if users dont like it they can go play on an altcoin. ..

All devs.  Not just core devs.  I wouldn't expect you to be honest about that, though.  You're too busy trying to tell people what they shouldn't be allowed to do.     

once you see that DCG is regulated by america. and DCG can pull that same 2017 tactic again. and you see that CFTC are trying to take place over the SEC. thus allowing a new door for the EPA to jump in..
.. you should see the risks of possibility. to be risk aware

anyway its not that CFTC have power of me (bitcoin user but british)
its not power over me
its the big exchanges and merchants (THE ECONOMIC NODES) which are regulated and...
..regulators have power over THEM

YOU KNOW THIS STUFF dont put your amnesia hat on now, dont play dumb and then try hugging your pals back to sleep telling them everything is fine and they dont need to do anything..
you know full well about the NYA and the mandated code event all sponsored and organised by those within the DCG portfolio

If you took off your dementia hat, you'd realise no one has amnesia.  No one is going to remember things that never actually occurred (outside of your imagination).  If anything, your views were more closely aligned with what the NYA group wanted, because they were asking for a hardfork.  You want a hardfork.  Guess what?  This so-called "economic majority" of yours didn't get what they wanted.  Because they were never the true majority.  The majority decided not to pursue a hardfork at that time.  That's the reality you still seem unable to recognise.

Now, if you're quite finished trying to distort recorded events and generally being a paranoid-delusional crackpot, screeching about boogeymen and jumping at shadows, please let some sanity prevail and stop spouting nonsense.

[BlackHatCoiner]

No, “climate change” is not real.

This is just nonsense. Climate is changing, you should have noticed this by now. Temperature is changing. There is increased drought. It is harming health. Unless you're about to question every paper out there?

And when a religion is the State religion, guess what? It will be the means the State will use to justify collecting and stealing money from its citizens, while they bend down their heads and consent.

Sure and it can be used as a weapon (it's already been), but that doesn't mean there's no climate change.

Its not just greenpeace. Basically anyone who knows how much power is wasted by mining btc would agree.

If it's securing the network it isn't waste. It might be for you, who isn't using bitcoin, but apparently not for everybody else.

[snipie]

Don't be naive, it has nothing to do with the environtment, they are attacking bitcoin because bankers are greenpeace donors.

Can you imagine that the electricity (nuclear, coil, oil...) used by thousands of banks in their building, machines...and millions of tree cut for their daily supplements are greenish and machines used to mine Bitcoin are bad?
I am pro saving the planet and cutting useless waste of earth resources but this is just hypocrisy from their sides.
Ethereum made a move that needs to be evaluated in middle and long term since it is a big change from one of the biggest cryptocurrencies.

[darkangel11]

Greenpeace? Aren't they the idiots who were protesting against oil drilling platforms by sailing around one of such platforms in a boat powered by a diesel engine?

you mean the same people that wanted to take photos of clmate change of how icebergs are being broken.. by sailing in a icebreaker ship.

oh the guys that printed a billion paper leaflets to campaign about deforrestation

That's right. Also rich idiots idiots. They are raising a lot of money from brainwashed rich individuals (or maybe not brainwashed but more of that later). In 2013 they lost £3m because a member of their group decided to play with the raised money on the stock market and lost it all

As for those brainwashed or not, their arctic campaign managed to stop Shell from drilling there, but other oil companies continued to do so. This pout Shell at a disadvantage. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the competitors donated to the cause.

[Bitstar_coin]

All this BS will basically turn into a meme at this point.
Environmentalists to the Bitcoin miners: USE GREEN ENERGY!
The Bitcoin miners: Starts using more green energy.
Environmentalists to the Bitcoin miners: DON'T USE ENERGY! YOU ARE WASTING EHERGY!
Bitcoin miners: But we are using green energy now.
I don't know how to continue this meme/joke. Maybe someone, who is smarter than me would write a punchline at the end.
In summary: We can't do anything to please the anti-Bitcoiners. Haters gonna hate, it doesn't matter what you do.

At the end of the day, bitcoin is found guilty on both counts, btc using green energy is guilty, don't use green energy is even more guilty. It is a back and forth meme that will never end as long as the name bitcoin exists.
Even though it has been shown on several occasions that btc mining is not a threat to the environment nor waste energy, the anti-bitcoin will never change their views towards btc.

[franky1]

Because they were never the true majority.  The majority decided not to pursue a hardfork at that time.  That's the reality you still seem unable to recognise.

such ignorance and lies from you are astonishing you have been debunked dozens of times. you keep accepting you been debunked, forget that you got debunked to then try to push your nonsense again that there was no hardfork to activate segwit

hard data in the blockchain. show that the NYA(blueline) triggered at 80% to start ignoring opposition blocks, to get segwit(redline) activated
by showing a high segwit acceptance via removing opposition blocks.

segwit(redline) only reached a natural consensus of 43.75% in july
but it was because of the blue line which was the NYA which required a flag to reach 80% for a period of time. to then trigger the rejection of opposers
the trigger event of ignoring opposing blocks to segwitshows that the red line then went unnaturally horizontal in an even straight ligne.. because MATH
every day e144 block. if all blocks were 100% segwit signalling due to 0 opposers plays out like this
882-43.75%      1026-50.89%      1170-58%      1314-65.18%
1458-72.32%    1602-79.46%      1746-86.6%   1890-93.75%
2016-100%

thus had 100% on (unnatural to actually have 100% in a decentralised world)
everyone can see the block data

segwit had 100% because there was 0% opposition.
in a natural consensus of decentralised world 100% is not natural

the only way there was 0% opposition is because the opposition blocks were removed by august 1st.
do you know what also happened on august 1st yep BCH
yes the blockdata and BCH exist. there was a fork. now stop being so forgetful

stop pretending segwit was soft becasue the soft had only 20%.. and remember that it was a hard because there was 100% opposition due to the hard mandate tactics to ignore opposers before segwit activated. and yes there was a fork because BCH was created.. and no bch did not create themselves. they were pushed off btc into a fork via the block rejects

there is DATA, there is actual real life proof of events..

so after 5 years of your ignorant trolling pretending you keep forgetting and cant remember events.. just stop

the CODE. the blocdata, is more proof than your social drama links of peoples opinion that wanted to set narratives to shift blame
...
and with that said
give up the social drama games of loyal buddy siding..
instead try to be helpful and actually know that events occurred and those mandated upgrade activations can happen again. so that people can be risk aware incase another mandated activation happened where the tactics are used to activate a feature like PoS

oh and you do realise that the core devs admit it occurred.. so why are you 7 years later trying to pretend it didnt happen. because its no longer fanboy protectionism of your favoured devs reputation for aiding in pulling off the tactic by pretending they didnt.. because they admit it did happen. so whats your agenda for your ignorance?