Banning PoW would benefit Bitcoin; it's the main thing preventing it from becoming more popular right now. Having the government force the Bitcoin community to do what they've been unable to do themselves would be the best of all worlds for them.
The US is the second largest polluter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...
I mean, that would mean exponentially more expensive food…
https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/03/1086822
My take is we need to allow unlimited emissions of carbon dioxide and nitrogen (reduction in other stuff though actually toxic). It increases food growth (plants love carbon) and arable land and decreases poverty. Plus cheaper energy means improved quality of life and technological advancement.
We have centuries of known fuel sources and can move to nuclear any time we wish.
A carbon tax effectively increases human suffering for the hope of reduced temperatures. In reality, the cost is passed to consumers and there’s no indication it will reduce global temperatures.
Your take is so misinformed that we all have to wonder how you could have twisted yourself into such a position
CO2 is the primary driver of climate change and will do far more harm to these plants/crops that 'love' excess CO2 than you seem to understand.
Having worked on climate models and read many papers I have become skeptical we know the manner or degree humans have an effect.
Those with a statistics background should look at the data honestly. We have relatively poor data (very sparse, unknown error rate, high variance, measurements taken with different mechanisms, etc) that can’t be validated. With correlations abounding in every which way. We also have a precision problem when we look at global temperatures in the past, we simply don’t know when we are taking a 1-5% change in temp.
You cannot prove carbon does absolutely anything. We have a correlation not causation. It could be natural carbon increases with temperatures. It could be our measurement mechanism is just wrong. It could be plant growth will expand to meet a new homeostasis with the carbon (imo highly likely). From the same measurements we use to show the Earth is warming we can show carbon levels have been higher previously on Earth.
> CO2 is the primary driver of climate change and will do far more harm to these plants/crops that 'love' excess CO2 than you seem to understand.
North America was covered in a sheet of ice until a few thousand years ago. The largest desert in Africa was a full of life during the same time period. Both disappeared before the industrial revolution and we have been seeing carbon increase exponentially ever since; as visible in the linked website
https://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
Now once we cover that, the question is what too do? We know cheap energy directly correlates with quality of life. Easy thought exercise - is your life easier walking or driving a car? Is it easier with a wood burning stove or a gas oven?
The argument we should reduce something that we know improves life and remove it requires a high level of proof. The threshold hasn’t been met. Even if it had, is China going to cut emissions? Do you really think wealthy will? No. They won’t. China will expand and continue to produce more overtaking the US in every category - they’ll use the cheap energy we aren’t using. The US will be destitute due to us cutting all energy production. Now what? Is the world better off? Germany is doing that right now, let’s check back in a couple years and see how that goes…
My point is that (1) we don’t have solid enough evidence to reduce the quality of life in our civilization and (2) even if we had said evidence, we couldn’t meaningfully make an impact- tax or no tax. So you’ll have all the downside, with no gain.
This is probably where you get your information on CO2: https://twitter.com/CkDexter15/status/1569530162873516034
All taxes collected are redistributed back to citizens.
Best of both words - progressive taxation and incentive to develop anti-carbon tevh.
This has been enacted in Canada. If you care about the environment this isn't the way to go.
But fact is, greenhouse gases have the potential to end humanity, and the US is not addressing them enough.
Since Bitcoin relies on PoW, banning PoW effectively bans mining Bitcoin. On the surface, why that would make Bitcoin more popular is nonsensical, but I see two interpretations, and I’m guessing you mean the second one:
1) Banning PoW mining in the US, like they did in China, severely limits industrial-scale Bitcoin mining in another big part of the world, lowering the total mining incentive, and moving mining out to places where people don’t object to it and where electricity is cheap and in excess: this somewhat lowers the total hash rate, conflicts less with our growing energy demand in populated areas, but more significantly makes the environmental cost more abstract to people and thus easier to swallow. It’s a lot more upsetting to see a power plant down the river mining Bitcoin than knowing they come from somewhere called “the cloud”.
2) Banning PoW mining in the US could somehow incentivise towards a PoS transition, like with Ethereum. I don’t see that happening for Bitcoin. Sorry.
You have a lot to learn then because your analogy is weak. PoW vs PoS debate is one of decentralization, power, democratization and control.
As for bitcoin being dated: it’s ossification is intentional. It is, by design, a predictable and reliable monetary system.
Now that's funny!
In 2028, how many new US dollars will enter circulation? How many bitcoin?
It already happened. 10 years ago a pizza was worth how much? And how many bitcoins do you need now for one pizza?
I do suspect it will trend toward stability on a decades timeline.
Some dude though about some basic concept of decentralization and that's it.
This was not some mastermind who created the perfect money system.
There are massive amounts of issues with Bitcoin in particular.
Alone one reason why Ethereum was trying to be ASIC resistent was to make GPUs stronger and allowing for more / better decentralization.
Plenty of people who are no longer able to recover their wallets (I know two friends having lost 150k$\initial investment of 10k$).
Fraud issues like you see in El Salvador.
The huge changes in value (no Bitcoin is apparently not stable and independent from the economic market).
And it doesn't even solve the trust issue. As soon as you wanna spend Bitcoin you need other systems like smart contract (which also doesn't solve the problem) or trusting third party.
The only advantage of Bitcoin is that's unregulated and everyone is taking a bit of it who is fast enough, rich enough or smart enough from everyone else who is not.
In order for Bitcoin to remain secure, the $$$ amount spent on electricity to mine Bitcoin has to be commensurate with the value of Bitcoin purchased on the markets. Because there is only so much electricity in the world that can be allocated to mining, this places an upper bound on the price that Bitcoin can reach in the markets.
It won't happen for bitcoin. PoW is such a fundamentally intrinsic part of what bitcoin is, that a transition to PoS will never happen, nor would it be desirable for most bitcoin holders who actively believe PoW to be the intrinsically interesting invention, and PoS to simply be a slight iteration of the old system. PoW was never a fundamental part of what ethereum was, because ethereum is fundamentally just whatever Vitalik and team and their early investors want it to be.
Ethereum, or any other PoS token, isn't a real alternative to bitcoin. It's something else that covers different use cases, and I'm still not sure what those use cases are.
Also Bitcoin will 100% not remove proof of work ever. The overwhelming majority of node operators would not agree to that, ever. It goes against the ethos of Bitcoin. Proof of work is part of the social contract, right up there with 21 million hard cap and users running their own nodes.
It would be interesting to see some real numbers on that claim. For me, much bigger would be volatile value, lack of places to spend it, weekly stories about people losing life savings because off coding errors and whatnot and just generally that it seems to be an interesting solution to a problem I don't have.
PoW is in there somewhere, but nowhere near the top.
But it's irrelevant, the community is already stuck in this place.
All hail the great Satoshi. Thou shalt not change but one #define.