Cryptocurrency as the next significant stage for computing technology, not just an investment

[pcock]

You won't make any money on the stock market thinking a week is a long time. 

I ended up getting money stolen from my account by my brokerage over that shit they were so desperate to get me to sell, and they are still paying for adverts making sure everyone knows they've covered their shorts. I'm reassessing the situation mid April.

Edited February 6, 2021 by pcock

[Silent Member]

37 minutes ago, pcock said:

I ended up getting money stolen from my account by my brokerage over that shit they were so desperate to get me to sell, and they are still paying for adverts making sure everyone knows they've covered their shorts. 

Well, that doesn't sound legal?

[pcock]

Just now, Silent Member said:

Well, that doesn't sound legal?

It doesn't to me either, but there's not alot I can do about it apart from move broker, which I've done. They auto applied super high stoplosses and charged me to remove them. If I hadn't have removed them I would have lost my shares at a loss. It would be better for me to just hold them now to see how it plays out. 

 

[pcock]

5 minutes ago, pcock said:

It doesn't to me either, but there's not alot I can do about it apart from move broker, which I've done. They auto applied super high stoplosses and charged me to remove them. If I hadn't have removed them I would have lost my shares at a loss. It would be better for me to just hold them now to see how it plays out. 

 

It was up 58 percent after open yesterday, and once again, they shut the whole stock down and lo and behold a slow bleed all day after that. 

[Berk]

 

4 hours ago, pcock said:

It doesn't to me either, but there's not alot I can do about it apart from move broker, which I've done. They auto applied super high stoplosses and charged me to remove them. If I hadn't have removed them I would have lost my shares at a loss. It would be better for me to just hold them now to see how it plays out. 

 

This sucks.

I am on trading 212 myself for some Penny / meme stonk lols now and then. Just started with those though. Not sure where it's gonna go. Bought some sub Penny vape stock, got a million shares for about 750 euros. Then it went up and I could sell 500k for 750 euros. So now I just have 500k for free basically and I'll see where it goes. I could post the ticket here but maybe that's considered spam I don't know I'll put in a spoiler

Spoiler

it's $hcmc

 

 

 

 

 

 

[chim]

5 hours ago, Silent Member said:

Well, that doesn't sound legal?

Apparently it's legal when you do it to Joe Small-time. There's been talk of a class-action thing but that is a can of worms that would justifiably tie-in owners of other platforms as they too were affected by this bullcrap. Just don't see it happening under Boomer laws, plus broker platforms have pretty ridiculous clauses (like, waiving your right to sue). It's pretty impressive how much they've dumped during the halts and force-selling. It does tell you something about the need to get in and out quick. 

[iococoi]

[Silent Member]

Let's hope they remember their passwords!

[iococoi]

follow up..

 

[usagi]

 

[brian trageskin]

flol

[dcom]

Quote

“It’s very bad that all this energy is being literally wasted in a lottery.”

Bitcoin consumes 'more electricity than Argentina' (BBC)

[dcom]

Quote

Will everyone want to buy digital artworks? Probably not; the tangible feeling of a book or painting is undeniable. But the digitally native might be willing to pony up and lay claim to a Dril tweet. The market for NFTs is said to be worth about $100 million today.

People are selling their tweets on the blockchain. Yes, really. (Input)

[realthanks]

2 hours ago, dcom said:

Bitcoin consumes 'more electricity than Argentina' (BBC)

computers use electricity? groundbreaking research...

i read an interesting point somewhere else. it should be obvious to even the smoothest of brains that mining is significantly more profitable when using your own renewable energy. in fact it's only profitable at all with near-zero cost electricity, aka... excess capacity that would have been wasted because it costs too much to transport, e.g. hydro-dams in the middle of nowhere with not enough people around to consume all the power. now consider that excess capacity is a problem only renewable energy has (coal power plants never have excess capacity because you can't just stop burning coal if you're producing too much electricity)

therefore mining should be able to HELP renewable energy's scalability in the near future. it could act as a subsidy for renewables, solving the problem of excess capacity in the face of insufficient demand. there is now incentive to invest in new renewable sources in places where it used to be economically unsustainable - people not buying all your electricity? just mine BTC with the rest lol

it's become amusing to me that every anti-crypto article out there reads as salt written by people who missed the boat on BTC. now someone get me figures on how much power entire nationwide networks are using just pushing GBP around; where are HSBC's giant solar panels?

Edited February 12, 2021 by realthanks

[chenGOD]

8 minutes ago, realthanks said:

computers use electricity? groundbreaking research...

i read an interesting point somewhere else. it should be obvious to even the smoothest of brains that mining is significantly more profitable when using your own renewable energy. in fact it's only profitable at all with near-zero cost electricity, aka... excess capacity that would have been wasted because it costs too much to transport, e.g. hydro-dams in the middle of nowhere with not enough people around to consume all the power. now consider that excess capacity is a problem only renewable energy has (coal power plants never have excess capacity because you can't just stop burning coal if you're producing too much electricity)

therefore mining should be able to HELP renewable energy's scalability in the near future. it could act as a subsidy for renewables, solving the problem of excess capacity in the face of insufficient demand. there is now incentive to invest in new renewable sources in places where it used to be economically unsustainable - people not buying all your electricity? just mine BTC with the rest lol

it's become amusing to me that every anti-crypto article out there reads as salt written by people who missed the boat on BTC. now someone get me figures on how much power entire nationwide networks are using just pushing GBP around; where are HSBC's giant solar panels?

The difference of course being that GBP are actually worth pushing around. Estimates from data centre usage (that's all data centres, not just financial institutions) indicate that BTC uses between 20% (in the article linked here) to almost half of data centre usage (in the uploaded article).

Mining BTC is economically unsustainable, which should be obvious from its very design. When BTC mining facilities moved in to Quebec to take advantage of cheap energy rates from the use of hydro, they were using almost half of total generating capacity from the province.

Renewable Energy Will Not Solve Bitcoin's Sustainability Problem

As this article demonstrates, a better comparison is between payments systems:

 

Comparing Bitcoin’s energy consumption to other payment systems

To put the energy consumed by the Bitcoin network into perspective we can compare it to another payment system like VISA for example. According to VISA, the company consumed a total amount of 740,000 Gigajoules of energy (from various sources) globally for all its operations. This means that VISA has an energy need equal to that of around 19,304 U.S. households. We also know VISA processed 138.3 billion transactions in 2019. With the help of these numbers, it is possible to compare both networks and show that Bitcoin is extremely more energy intensive per transaction than VISA (note that the chart below compares a single Bitcoin transaction to 100,000 VISA transactions). The difference in carbon intensity per transaction is even greater (see footprints), as the energy used by VISA is relatively “greener” than the energy used by the Bitcoin mining network. The carbon footprint per VISA transaction is only 0.45 grams CO2eq.

Maybe moving to proof of stake works, but proof of stake has not been settled as of yet (I believe).

In the meantime, average (median) confirmation time for a Tx is around 10 minutes.

Imagine standing around for 10 minutes while a Tx confirms for a cup of coffee.

BTC energy usage.pdf

[dcom]

The Bit Short: Inside Crypto’s Doomsday Machine (Crypto Anonymous)

[cichlisuite]

On 2/12/2021 at 5:40 PM, realthanks said:

computers use electricity? groundbreaking research...

i read an interesting point somewhere else. it should be obvious to even the smoothest of brains that mining is significantly more profitable when using your own renewable energy. in fact it's only profitable at all with near-zero cost electricity, aka... excess capacity that would have been wasted because it costs too much to transport, e.g. hydro-dams in the middle of nowhere with not enough people around to consume all the power. now consider that excess capacity is a problem only renewable energy has (coal power plants never have excess capacity because you can't just stop burning coal if you're producing too much electricity)

therefore mining should be able to HELP renewable energy's scalability in the near future. it could act as a subsidy for renewables, solving the problem of excess capacity in the face of insufficient demand. there is now incentive to invest in new renewable sources in places where it used to be economically unsustainable - people not buying all your electricity? just mine BTC with the rest lol

it's become amusing to me that every anti-crypto article out there reads as salt written by people who missed the boat on BTC. now someone get me figures on how much power entire nationwide networks are using just pushing GBP around; where are HSBC's giant solar panels?

From an energy consumption point of view, bitcoin mining is just about the most backward concept you could imagine. It's like putting a huge block of stone on a already overloaded cart pulled by an ass.

[zkom]

On 2/12/2021 at 6:40 PM, realthanks said:

it's become amusing to me that every anti-crypto article out there reads as salt written by people who missed the boat on BTC.

It's become amusing how people defending crypto currencies also appear to be people who bought into a speculative investment bubble with something that has no real world value and need to come up quickly with all sorts of rationalizations and excuses pulled out of their asses to make it sound like a rational and ethical thing to do. 

Yes, let's build hydroelectric dams in the middle of untouched wilderness to mine bitcoins because what could possibly be the ecological impact of that?

[cwmbrancity]

You dig them up or filter them out of dam water?

Far out.

[zlemflolia]

On 2/12/2021 at 9:24 AM, chenGOD said:

The difference of course being that GBP are actually worth pushing around. Estimates from data centre usage (that's all data centres, not just financial institutions) indicate that BTC uses between 20% (in the article linked here) to almost half of data centre usage (in the uploaded article).

Mining BTC is economically unsustainable, which should be obvious from its very design. When BTC mining facilities moved in to Quebec to take advantage of cheap energy rates from the use of hydro, they were using almost half of total generating capacity from the province.

Renewable Energy Will Not Solve Bitcoin's Sustainability Problem

As this article demonstrates, a better comparison is between payments systems:

 

Comparing Bitcoin’s energy consumption to other payment systems

To put the energy consumed by the Bitcoin network into perspective we can compare it to another payment system like VISA for example. According to VISA, the company consumed a total amount of 740,000 Gigajoules of energy (from various sources) globally for all its operations. This means that VISA has an energy need equal to that of around 19,304 U.S. households. We also know VISA processed 138.3 billion transactions in 2019. With the help of these numbers, it is possible to compare both networks and show that Bitcoin is extremely more energy intensive per transaction than VISA (note that the chart below compares a single Bitcoin transaction to 100,000 VISA transactions). The difference in carbon intensity per transaction is even greater (see footprints), as the energy used by VISA is relatively “greener” than the energy used by the Bitcoin mining network. The carbon footprint per VISA transaction is only 0.45 grams CO2eq.

Maybe moving to proof of stake works, but proof of stake has not been settled as of yet (I believe).

In the meantime, average (median) confirmation time for a Tx is around 10 minutes.

Imagine standing around for 10 minutes while a Tx confirms for a cup of coffee.

BTC energy usage.pdf 822.26 kB · 0 downloads

don't know why I have to point this out but the visa network depends upon the existence of states and the militaries that back them to create the legal frameworks that they operate under, as well as the existence of state backed fiat currencies like USD.  so does industrial computer production but these comparisons are just meaningless.  bitcoin is not the same as the visa network so comparing them means nothing.  bitcoin is an entire currency AND transaction network AND decentralized computing network

Edited February 17, 2021 by cyanobacteria

[zlemflolia]

7 hours ago, zkom said:

It's become amusing how people defending crypto currencies also appear to be people who bought into a speculative investment bubble with something that has no real world value and need to come up quickly with all sorts of rationalizations and excuses pulled out of their asses to make it sound like a rational and ethical thing to do. 

Yes, let's build hydroelectric dams in the middle of untouched wilderness to mine bitcoins because what could possibly be the ecological impact of that?

building hydroelectric dams in the middle of untouched wilderness has nothing to do with bitcoin.  just because theyre doing it to mine bitcoins doesn't mean it's bitcoin's fault.  it's clearly the fault of capitalism, the bitcoin network doesn't have a mind of its own that plugged into peoples brains and shipped the hydroelectric dam building materials into untouched wilderness, while the state that let it happen.  imagine blaming well known problems of capitalism on bitcoin

[zlemflolia]

8 hours ago, cichlisuite said:

From an energy consumption point of view, bitcoin mining is just about the most backward concept you could imagine. It's like putting a huge block of stone on a already overloaded cart pulled by an ass.

bitcoin is in the initial stages of scaling.  second layer networks like lightning will exponentially increase the transaction throughput, putting the environmental efficiency of bitcoin on par with or superior to that of other currencies and transaction networks built upon the petrodollar and all of the environmental destruction involved with it

defending currencies backed by widespread terrorism, war, and oil extraction, over bitcoin, is so mindless that it brings into question the general geopolitical intelligence of anyone making claims like this.  i say this as a communist who wants to abolish currency and yet i still acknowledge the superiority of bitcoin on many dimensions to imperial state backed fiat currencies

Edited February 17, 2021 by cyanobacteria

[chenGOD]

21 minutes ago, cyanobacteria said:

don't know why I have to point this out but the visa network depends upon the existence of states and the militaries that back them to create the legal frameworks that they operate under, as well as the existence of state backed fiat currencies like USD.  so does industrial computer production but these comparisons are just meaningless.  bitcoin is not the same as the visa network so comparing them means nothing.  bitcoin is an entire currency AND transaction network AND decentralized computing network

The point is comparing the energy cost per transaction, so it is an entirely valid comparison.

And BTC is not a computing network, it is an application layer. Regardless, the article that dcom posted should be very worrying to anybody holding significant amounts of crypto.

[zlemflolia]

6 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

The point is comparing the energy cost per transaction, so it is an entirely valid comparison.

And BTC is not a computing network, it is an application layer. Regardless, the article that dcom posted should be very worrying to anybody holding significant amounts of crypto.

it's literally a network protocol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_network

>The bitcoin network is a peer-to-peer payment network that operates on a cryptographic protocol. Users send and receive bitcoins, the units of currency, by broadcasting digitally signed messages to the network using bitcoin cryptocurrency wallet software

energy cost per transaction is a meaningless metric and bitcoin has no energy cost per transaction, it has energy cost per block.  blocks can hold a certain number of transactions presently, but with second layer scaling technologies there can be an arbitrary number of transactions per block through lightning network settlements taking significantly less block space.  if were going to compare energy costs of blocks to visa then we have to include the energy cost of visa's "block" i.e. settlement layer which is the court system of the state backed by its military and global imperial dominance

genuinely getting sick of this misinformation that takes minimal knowledge to refute

dcom's article is just standard tether FUD.  i don't care if tether is made illegal and bitcoin drops to 3k i will just buy more personally

Edited February 17, 2021 by cyanobacteria

[cichlisuite]

21 minutes ago, cyanobacteria said:

bitcoin is in the initial stages of scaling.  second layer networks like lightning will exponentially increase the transaction throughput, putting the environmental efficiency of bitcoin on par with or superior to that of other currencies and transaction networks built upon the petrodollar and all of the environmental destruction involved with it

defending currencies backed by widespread terrorism, war, and oil extraction, over bitcoin, is so mindless that it brings into question the general geopolitical intelligence of anyone making claims like this.  i say this as a communist who wants to abolish currency and yet i still acknowledge the superiority of bitcoin on many dimensions to imperial state backed fiat currencies

i'm not defending anything, apart from the environment, which we rape again and again. see, this is the fundamental problem with corporate thinking: you calculate "efficiency" in comparison to all the numerous layers of human exploitation of resources and call it "progress" or "development" or "achievement". meanwhile, it's still just another layer of excessive power demand on a system that is already strained to the breaking point. the baseline of such analysis is ever shifting upwards, obscuring the ever weakening foundations that it stands on. and if i use an analogy of tetris: instead of eliminating rudimentary layers beneath it and keep within manageable parameters, you stack one upon the other until it's GAME OVER.