Hacker News Reader

Comment by anyfactor | Hacker News Reader

Crypto mining really isn't for any country that doesn't have energy surplus and favorable political situation (exception being China of course).

View on HN

Countries with an energy surplus can export crypto tokens, but they can often export more stable and useful things instead (aluminum, for example).

So I'd have to add a stipulation: it's for people in countries where people have access to surplus energy, but don't have access to better ways to export the energy.

What’s the distinction? Of course in both cases when you say “the country has an energy surplus” or “the country can export something” you’re actually talking about people in the country.

> when you say “the country has an energy surplus” or “the country can export something” you’re actually talking about people in the country

I'm not.

In most developed countries, energy is one of the following:

- nationalized

- "privatized" (e.g. Russia, where the companies are partially govt-owned or the oligarchs are Putin cronies)

- privatized oligopoly

In any case, unless the government or the energy company wants to go into mining, the surplus can't just be transferred into mining.

So the question becomes, does the energy surplus actually translate into lower prices for consumers, and the consumers can then convert it into assets?

That's what I meant by "people": do the consumers of the energy actually have a way to monetize the surplus?

"crypto mining isnt for qny country that has better things to do"

ftfy

Countries with large oil surpluses that they can’t sell because of embargoes because of their nuclear programs which they paradoxically don’t need because they have so much cheap oil.

They are still forbidden from selling that Bitcoin, too. Now, they may do so anyways in violation of international sanctions I suppose but, and I can't stress this enough, I don't think its a good idea for hostile hermit kingdoms to evade sanctions no matter how they choose to do so.

> Now, they may do so anyways in violation of international sanctions I suppose but, and I can't stress this enough, I don't think its a good idea for hostile hermit kingdoms to evade sanctions no matter how they choose to do so.

Because sanctions are for their own good, right? Sanctions aren’t a threat, they are the punishment.

Other countries/companies shouldn’t do business with sanctioned countries, but obviously a sanctioned country can only benefit by breaking the sanctions.

It’s like being in prison in the USA: it’s natural - and in the prisoner’s best interest should they succeed - to try to run away.

isn't nuclear energy much cleaner?

I don't think Iran is that big into crypto. If it were the clampdown would come sooner.

> LONDON, May 21 (Reuters) - Around 4.5% of all bitcoin mining takes place in Iran, allowing the country to earn hundreds of millions of dollars in cryptocurrencies that can be used to buy imports and lessen the impact of sanctions, a new study has found.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/iran-uses-crypto-mining-l...

> Crypto mining really isn't for any country

That is where that statement needs to stop.

I think its an investment in future, those who are ahead in this race they are just ahead. The countries that fail to realize this dont have their eyes on the future. Malaysia in this case might be thinking that crypto is a threat to their Islamic Banking model.

Is electricity surplus really a country level thing?

Grids aren't really elastic so you either have a good grid or you don't. Even a country the size of the US only has 3 grids

I don't know if this addresses your question, but electricity surpluses are exported between countries belonging to the same wide area synchronous grid:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_area_synchronous_grid

Reply on news.ycombinator.com