The article briefly mentions power problems, before misleadingly suggesting a solution is to trade bitcoin instead of mining it, because “no machines are involved in the trading process” (false). Later on in the article, the crypto company responsible for the atms says their solution is to rent electricity from other people to mine in exchange for a bit of money, which is heavily downplaying the amount of power needed to make mining profitable.
Unless I’m missing something, this article seems to have a lot of text, but doesn’t actually say much.
Sometimes cool cyberpunk theories crash upon the harsh shores of reality.
Harsh shores of reality also crash on capitalism.
Who loses here?
The miner in this case would be, once again to be painfully clear, a warlord.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cassandra
https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-d...
The losers predominantly would be the people of Lebanon, forever subsisting on the largesse of the UN and foreign powers with their own interests - their meager allowances paid out in dollars only to be completely squandered (the more UN donates the higher the prices will go, reliably soaking up all foreign assistance completely) on an artificially inflated energy "market" that enables narco terrorists to launder money via bitcoin.
The one doing the mining is being compensated with wealth.
And society in general is being compensated with a more effective allocation of resources.