[coralreef]

Supporting Bitcoin == Supporting a decentralized, permissionless, censorship-resistant network.

Supporting coal subsidies + lack of carbon tax == Supporting global warming.

If Bitcoin ran on solar panels nobody would give a shit. But because miners are able to arbitrage energy prices thanks to government subsidies and lack of carbon tax, Bitcoin can run on fossil fuels as well.

If you want to fix global warming, the appropriate policy action is very simple, and very clear.

"Globally, subsidies remained large at $4.7 trillion (6.3 percent of global GDP) in 2015 and are projected at $5.2 trillion (6.5 percent of GDP) in 2017. The largest subsidizers in 2015 were China ($1.4 trillion), United States ($649 billion), Russia ($551 billion), European Union ($289 billion), and India ($209 billion)."

https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Glo...

"As of 2019, G20 governments, representing the world’s major economies, supported coal, oil, and gas production and consumption by, on average, $548 billion per year."

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/06/07/qa-fossil-fuel-subsidies

[postalrat]

"If Bitcoin ran on solar panels nobody would give a shit."

If you told someone that bitcoin mining uses more power than all the solar energy harvested throughout the world I think most people would say its a waste.

[coralreef]

Those people would say its a waste because they're imagining energy as a medium for the delivery of physical things. When energy fails to deliver something physical, they view it as a waste.

Money and value are social abstractions, not physical things. As an example: without trust in a government, fiat money would not function, and would become valueless.

Energy is the link between the physical world and the social-abstract human world.

[trinovantes]

I think it's a waste because that energy could've went to more productive on-demand energy-intensive uses like electrolysis, desalination, or carbon capture

[coralreef]

That's false because the energy capacity for those things was there already, and those things did not grow and proliferate to consume energy the way you see Bitcoin consuming energy.

The problem with those processes is no one is willing to pay for them, ie. no profit incentive. That is a separate issue involving public spending and creating incentives to support industry.

What you've done is imagine ways to spend money/energy that isn't yours for a greater public good, which is pretty easy but otherwise overly simplistic.

[aww_dang]

Many people consume things others perceive as wasteful. Value is subjective. If consumers didn't value their purchases, they wouldn't buy them. There are some who say commenting online is a waste of time, but here we are.

[agumonkey]

warning, miners interests can make them go weird ways, rumors of texas natural gas companies cutting a deal with them to save their ass

i wish there was a solar mining farm just to see