I have plenty of karma to burn, so here is some information coming from reputable sources that also suggest where the problem really is.
https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index/comparisons
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/business/2022/04/25/watt-dnt-...
https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index/comparisons
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/business/2022/04/25/watt-dnt-...
Don't forget most mining is done in China, not Europe. And your first link mainly tries to show that Bitcoin consumption isn't a lot compared to other uses. So I don't really see the point.
What when they take actions that you not only don’t support, but they impact you and your livelihood? With the same level of not using kids gloves?
Cryptocurrency is a cancerous scam that needs to die. But I want to give them same due process rights as any other activity.
This doesn't make sense. You want it to die, which is done via LAWS. Yet you complain about the laws passed by the Chinese government to kill it?
https://fortune.com/2022/01/04/crypto-banned-china-other-cou...
China isn't alone in banning it, and the US COULD ban it as well (similar to how gold was banned in the past).
They not only choose not to, but it is rapidly becoming "financialized" - Trading on the CME, and the major players on wall street looking to get into the game and collect their "rent".
Try protesting and legally challenging laws in both cases as infringing on your rights.
Normally people like to write "authoritarian communist government" to make it sound really bad.
So like the people of China want crypto banned, and the government does it and this is BAD.
whereas the rest of the world adds fuel to this ponzi scheme and this is good?
Tell us, when the US outlawed ownership of gold under executive order 6102 was this "authoritarian" because it is unclear that the people voted on it or asked for it?
I'd say expropriation of gold was authoritarian, i.e. undemocratic, because it was done by president, not Congress. US, with its strong president, is not a perfect democracy, powerful groups/president can do things that demos does not want.
That's not claiming it was a bad decision or policy. There were probably good reasons for that step, and it may have helped the country.
Do you feel the same way when the "problem" is "people who want a say in government" or "student activists" or "Uyghurs" and "dealing" with it involves genocide? It's true that authoritarian countries can act decisively on real problems sometimes, when their own private politics align. But they far more regularly act "decisively" to make things worse, to crush freedoms, to cover up their own corruption, etc. It's not particularly admirable that once in a while they have good issues too.
That's why Democracy is the worst form of government excluding the alternatives. But it would be nice to have a democratic government that is also capable of acting decisively. I don't have any ideas how you'd do that, but it doesn't seem wrong to express the desire.
Democracy being swift like autocracy is basically impossible. Any pretense of democratic government action needs the discussion to happen, which takes lots of time, and this makes the action not swift.
Instead, the way western governments seem to approach these crises is that lawful process is violated by the government more or less, tough dubious measures are introduced more or less in the interest of the country, then some people protest, maybe lawsuits get filed, then justice system gets bogged down for years, and in some cases we get rulings that government broke the law. This usually changes nothing.
That's called "authoritarianism".
No, I dont admire them. That government has earned 0 respect, despite some hard numbers they can achieve (or not, who knows)
It seems to have worked out for them and eventually the cities became inhabited. But it was a huge gamble and here in the west we would call it a scam.
Of course one thing you can't fake is international currency when trading with other countries. But this is one thing China has more than enough of because we all pay them to make our goods.
if you look carefully, you can see that based on PPP China has overtaken the US. You may also notice that the US is the one on the downtrend?
Most countries have had serious economic and financial issues over the last few years.
Priorities. Bitcoin (as other POW based cryptocurrencies) waste a huge load of energy, with a single Bitcoin transaction that cost over US$100 of energy (old estimation when energy costs were a lot lower) and mining farms sprouting everywhere hosting thousands of nodes of which each one draws 2000-5000 Watts, just like one or two heaters, but kept on 24/7 with their fans pumping heat into the atmosphere. My point is that before looking at CERN, maybe, just maybe, they should look at other places where energy is wasted by turning it directly into money (and heat), also without creating businesses and jobs.
I don't think that's very doable though. Bitcoin ASICs only stay relevant for a short time, when they're surpassed by more efficient models, and no longer economically viable. I doubt the owners of these are willing to turn them off and let their investment expire without using them. Also, the increasing cost of electricity dramatically reduces that write-off period.
Besides that, CERN is mostly publicly funded and one huge consumer so the government has lots of control over them which they don't have over miners, which are also more fragmented between many different operators. And the research CERN do is not time critical.
So I still think it makes sense. CERN is one thing they can actually do without too much trouble and has a relatively large effect.
You're going to have to be more specific because right now I can't even figure out what you're trying to argue.