Bitcoin network power slumps as Kazakhstan crackdown hits crypto miners
reuters.com
reuters.com
Let's hope they stay shut off then.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/06/asia/kazakhstan-fuel-protests...
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/01/06/world/kazakhstan-pro...
And Kazahk authorities are far from democratic, they block internet in whole country to stop the protests, they did strange things with internet access last year also.
And they invited Russian troops to stop the unrest. And their (or the invited) military shoots to kill its own citizens.
Nat gas accounts for about 20% of Kazahktan's electricity generation mix.
> And Kazahk authorities are far from democratic, they block internet in whole country to stop the protests, they did strange things with internet access last year also. And they invited Russian troops to stop the unrest. And their (or the invited) military shoots to kill its own citizens.
This is all true, but also a bit beside the point given the above exchange.
But, whatever. Suppose I concede this point that coal consumption doesn't really have much of anything at all to do Kazahktan's current unrest. Doesn't that make nalrey's comment here totally moot?
It's not the same as the natgas used for power generation, which is almost entirely methane.
Not every energy crisis in the wolrd is caused by Bitcoin, which literally uses less energy than gamers or heated pools.
...think very carefully and very slowly about the following question: so what?
(The answer to that question will betray a wild misunderstanding of the political economy of Kazakhstan.)
> Not every energy crisis in the wolrd is caused by Bitcoin
Hm. I don't remember saying otherwise. I must have stuttered?
> which literally uses less energy than gamers or heated pools.
Globally. In Kazakhstan it consumes 8% of production, which is insane. 8% is a fucking huge number in a country experiencing an energy crisis.
Hell, it's a huge number period. By percentage comparison, that's all refrigeration and freezing in the US. Can you imagine? Insane.
Anyways, this is all beside the point. I'll avoid stuttering this time and repeat myself clearly and slowly this time:
>> But, whatever. Suppose I concede this point that coal consumption doesn't really have much of anything at all to do Kazahktan's current unrest. Doesn't that make nalrey's comment here totally moot?
What am I missing? Even of the whole of Kazakhstan stopped mining, and I hope they do, it wouldn’t kill Bitcoin. The difficulty will adjust but more miners will jump in as the difficulty goes down making it more affordable for others, fueled by greed unfortunately…
On another note, I’ve always wondered how so many people are running full nodes, knowing that they’re essentially hosting CP images and why this isn’t being cracked down on: https://internetofbusiness.com/bitcoin-blockchain-contains-i...
See "What Colour are your bits?" https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23
Essentially this is the "nonsense conclusions" described there, but in inverse. If you're not interested in those images and don't even know specifically how to decode them, then legally you're probably not in possession of them just as I'm not worried about accidentally generating something illegal in some encoding or other by running my random number generator. And nor is any prosecutor going to care.
Think this through for a bit. Governments have holdings in bitcoin. Financial institutions have holdings in bitcoin. Citizens have significant percentages of their savings in bitcoin. Bitcoin is available in various financial instruments now, so this would have knock-on effects in the wider market. A large percentage of crypto hash rate is from unknown parties or distributed on regular computers/phones/botnets, so the governments would have to invest money into mining equipment to run this 51% attack that would end up being totally dead money after the attack. You'd have lobbying from huge money sources to stop this happening. You'd have governments looking to take advantage of this. You'd be trying to destroy the legal tender of some countries which I believe is illegal under international law. By increasing the hash rate you'd be increasing the price of the coin and incentivizing people to defend against it. And, if it all happened, people could do what happened to Ethereum and simply fork Bitcoin from the point of the attack. No more mining equipment? Run PoS.
Sure, lobbying is an issue, but if the government is lobbied to support crypto, they support crypto. I'm starting from the assumption that they see it as an existential threat and want to eradicate it.
When I say "governments", I mean the likes if China, the US, and some key states of the EU. Really not that many.
El Salvador also had the US dollar as an official currency, does that mean they get to sue you if you destroy US dollars or devalue the currency (as the US can do)? Of course not, because while it's a currency the Salvadoran government agrees to accept, it's not actually their sovereign currency.
What governments have holdings in bitcoin? If you refer to El Salvador I don't think that this is a shining example. If you're referring to failed states, like Venezuela, I'd like to see a source for your assessment. Having as much funds as possible in hard currency is much more important for such countries. That's why I don't buy it.
> Financial institutions have holdings in bitcoin
I'm working in finance and argue that they don't hold funds in bitcoin. At least not their own funds. Sure, they're looking into crypto and blockchain. They could miss on the next big thing (yet to materialize). But I've yet to see a marketable offering, or a useful solution based on the technology by any reputable financial institution. If you know of an established bank (I rule out crypto exchanges in any form), which invests in crypto I'm interested in who this may be.
Completely shutting down all cryptos would have the following effects:
- Immediately reducing electricity consumption worldwide
- Making money transfer for illegal activities (drug, human trafficking, prostitution, gambling, ...) harder
- Making money laundering of said activities harder
- Reducing the electronic chip shortage
- Forcing a bunch of young, adventurous, often quite clever people to find another source of revenues. Hopefully by providing some tangible value to society
It sound like a good plan. The only real I see are for people using cryptos in authoritative regimes, so overall a net benefit for the world.
In any case, I found the above post compelling. What if critics of crypto pooled resources and waited for a major crisis, and then launched a 51% attack at just the right moment? It's an interesting thing to think about.
The mob of laser-eye HODLbugs will fall right in line and go on full social media attack against anyone supporting the old chain. All will all vehemently deny any ensuing comparison to ETH vs ETH classic.
[1] https://thehill.com/policy/international/588318-kazakhstan-g...
All Russia would have to do is fly one of their AWACS over a city and they could make a list of all the active Starlink transmitters, and get them arrested.
Otherwise, seems all we've really got is Ham Radio.
Suggestions as to what I'm missing here?
Building this out further, you could create a network like this:
But I agree, to be connected to the world at large, we need to make sure there are satellites, long haul ptp microwave wifi, and other methods connecting the islands.
My heart weeps for Kazakhstan, I pray that no more will be harmed.
Oppressive governments also use tools, like surveillance equipment and weapons. Nobody makes snide remarks about their dependence on technical solutions.
They have by far more valuables on hand than any bank. One shipping container farm == few megabucks depending on generation of ASIC miner chips.