It’s kind of crazy to think that digital supply chains are currently more opaque than physical supply chains. But here we are. We know which garments are manufactured in Xinjiang, but we don’t know which Bitcoins are mined there.
Agreed that we need to find ways to make PoW crypto (mainly Bitcoin) more climate friendly. But another key goal for Bitcoin is fungibility which seems inconsistent with tracking the provenance of each coin. Sure, PoS doesn't have the same climate problem but it is likely to end up being much more centralized because there is no natural way to dilute the holders/stakers. Seems to me that market forces to drive down the price of renewables is the only viable option. If we can encourage / speed up those market forces, even better.
Agreed that we should drive down the price of renewables, but I'm worried that it won't happen fast enough to substantially change the mix of energy that fuels Bitcoin in the near future. Seems to me like we should be willing to flex a bit on fungibility to avoid making climate change worse. Or, if not for the climate, just in an effort to protect Bitcoin, by reducing the risk that regulators come after Bitcoin. What damage will we do to the essence of Bitcoin if, for instance, we green-wrap Bitcoin and use the original Bitcoin to back a new, more energy efficient currency?
Yes Bitcoin definitely needs better marketing (I hear they don't have a marketing department). Maybe some sort of green opt-in by miners and other market participants (e.g. exchanges) would be a good marketing initiative. I doubt though the the incentives to tap whatever and where ever are the cheapest energy sources can be effectively changed. But those incentives will support renewables once those become the cheapest source.
Agreed that we need to find ways to make PoW crypto (mainly Bitcoin) more climate friendly. But another key goal for Bitcoin is fungibility which seems inconsistent with tracking the provenance of each coin. Sure, PoS doesn't have the same climate problem but it is likely to end up being much more centralized because there is no natural way to dilute the holders/stakers. Seems to me that market forces to drive down the price of renewables is the only viable option. If we can encourage / speed up those market forces, even better.
Agreed that we should drive down the price of renewables, but I'm worried that it won't happen fast enough to substantially change the mix of energy that fuels Bitcoin in the near future. Seems to me like we should be willing to flex a bit on fungibility to avoid making climate change worse. Or, if not for the climate, just in an effort to protect Bitcoin, by reducing the risk that regulators come after Bitcoin. What damage will we do to the essence of Bitcoin if, for instance, we green-wrap Bitcoin and use the original Bitcoin to back a new, more energy efficient currency?
Yes Bitcoin definitely needs better marketing (I hear they don't have a marketing department). Maybe some sort of green opt-in by miners and other market participants (e.g. exchanges) would be a good marketing initiative. I doubt though the the incentives to tap whatever and where ever are the cheapest energy sources can be effectively changed. But those incentives will support renewables once those become the cheapest source.