|
|
|
|
|
by randomhodler84
1509 days ago
|
|
Yes, I am advocating for this. My take on what you are saying is that you deem other uses of energy more appropriate — “you can’t use it that way! You must use it in this way”.
Ultimately it is market forces that determine if using energy for a particular purpose.
If there are no pollution externalities to add complexity, it is up to whomever is paying the bill on what they want to spend it on. I appreciate that some miners will find it rational to use their entire renewable power to mine Bitcoin; and that is ok. Not everyone wants to mine. For some, the utility of an EV is greater than that of mining, and so just looking at a energy/cost ratio ignores demand and utility. Additionally, the PoW paradigm was invented, and exists today, and there is not a lot one can do to stop it.
From 2009 onwards, humanity has decided to dedicate some percentage of global energy output and to the purposes of maintaining ledger security.
I have always said this is a good thing, and if you have a problem with this, complaining about it achieves nothing. |
|
And it's not just me who thinks 'other' uses are more critical: even you prefer light over bitcoins. You probably prefer goods and services also higher than Bitcoin hashes.
And in a world hurt by co2, everyone who has to suffer the consequences from climate change would also tell you what they think if they knew and could tell you.