Re:Bitcoin Sinks to $41,000 Amid ‘Extreme Fear’
by landemva on Friday January 07, 2022 @11:06AM
(#29840729)
Someone was willing to pay for the transctions, so they paid the amount of value it provided to them. I am curious why you think you can out-guess voluntary economic transactions by other people. Their bodies, their choices.
Re:Bitcoin Sinks to $41,000 Amid ‘Extreme Fear’
by falcolas on Friday January 07, 2022 @11:13AM
(#29840842)
The payment for transactions is using the same 'currency' as the transactions (and for a time "paid" for by the act of creating more BTC), so the actual cost of the electricity is not clearly linked to the transaction cost.
And the cost to our climate is absurdly higher than the individual $2-3 with all the previously closed coal plants being spun back up to facilitate all the transactions.
Re:Bitcoin Sinks to $41,000 Amid ‘Extreme Fear’
by landemva on Friday January 07, 2022 @11:34AM
(#29841178)
You have something there with '... not clearly linked to the transaction cost.'
Maybe you would be supportive of environmental parity tariffs to price the environmental problems created by manufacturing in locations which spew pollution. A few dollars extra on price of an iPhone or solar panels could even become a status symbol.
Yes. Entertainment value aside, it's a place for some remarkably useful discussions on niche topics.
> Move to renewable nuclear and who cares.
Renewable Nuclear? I haven't heard of that. If you mean renewables and nuclear, aside from the fact that it requires real money and a lot of time to do - there's still an absurd amount of energy being wasted for a single transaction. Recording transactions is a well explored space, and requiring energy on the same magnitude as homes or countries to do so is absurd.