A few days ago I posted about how Mozilla accepting cryptocurrency had created a stir, Mozilla has listened to people’s responses and is halting cryptocurrency donations until they review the current state of crypto to see if it is in line with their stance on the climate. They have said they will have an open and transparent process involving this.
A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox
Even if crypto wasn’t a giant scam, it uses to much energy/carbon emissions
people not understanding crypto, mad at crypto.
btc is not the only crypto, yet always the one used as an example for anti-crypto propaganda. and even if it was the only crypto, crypto overall use less electricity than conventional banking.
half the point of crypto is to not use the government/privately controlled banking system. anti-crypto activists getting mad at the wrong people and supporting the rich, because they were told to; by media, owned by the rich. awesome.
people up in arms over things they don’t understand is why the world is shit.
Then I more than welcome them to accept greener Cryptos only, which would eliminate all the most popular ones from the equation.
Conventional banking also does much more than just transactions.
The rich are the biggest Cryptos holders, it’s capitalism at its worst, unregulated capitalism.
I can only think of Elon Musk maniacally laughing on his coach while he caresses his white cat and prepares another tweet to maipulate crypto price and make thousands of working people loose money. True evil genious
look, just because that’s what crypto was meant to be, doesn’t mean that’s actually what it is.
the unfortunate truth is that cryptocurrency’s value is so closely tied with the amount of fiat that people invest into it that it’s impossible for it to be a standardized form of currency. there’s too much legitimate money to be gained by convincing people to invest in it that it will never break free of that dependency. it’s the same with any token based system that makes it to market (which, believe me, is the real goal of most alt system currencies). once actual money got into the mix, the dream of a standalone digital market place died. the best way to get crypto back on track would be to pull it from outside investment opportunities and make it standalone again.
also bad for the environment etc… made a huge post about this already but there’s a lot of those things out in circulation now. they’re a very convenient ponzi scheme, and it’s due to a combination of being innately tied to market value + the fact that not many people understand them
i have to disagree with your last statement just a small bit. the world is shit because people have realized there’s much to be gained when everyone else doesn’t fully understand what you’re really doing
Cryptos are scams. Always were, always will be.
The dollar is a far greater scam, with irredeemably more crimes to its name.
Logical fallacy. I said nothing about the dollar yet you assumed that just because I’m against cryptos I support it.
Well do you use any of it?
Ugh. I understand the problems with crypto, but I wish they’d just take the money.
Yeah, I doubt most of the people who complained about them accepting cryptocurrency will be donating in a traditional sense now.
And, like, there’s definitely worse decisions to be backpedaling on, but I definitely don’t want them backpedaling on more decisions in the future, just because there’s a shitstorm. Because there’s pretty much always a shitstorm whenever Mozilla does anything.
̶y̶e̶a̶h̶ ̶p̶l̶u̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶o̶s̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶i̶n̶s̶ ̶w̶e̶r̶e̶ ̶a̶l̶r̶e̶a̶d̶y̶ ̶m̶i̶n̶e̶d̶.̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶u̶s̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶m̶ ̶n̶o̶w̶ ̶a̶f̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶c̶a̶r̶b̶o̶n̶s̶ ̶a̶l̶r̶e̶a̶d̶y̶ ̶b̶e̶e̶n̶ ̶s̶p̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶e̶v̶e̶n̶ ̶m̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶a̶ ̶F̶U̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶p̶l̶a̶n̶e̶t̶
edit: nvm i had overlooked transaction verification consensus
Sending the money is actually what produces more money, so using it has the same fingerprint
not quite sure what you mean? the carbon footprint of a transaction is negligible in comparison to mining no?
Mining is the process of creating new coins, but these new coins are created when you add a transaction to the public ledger. You cannot dissociate mining from transactions, mining is in fact how the networks’s keepers are paid for maintaining the network and processing transactions. It is this way because it was supposed that BitCoin transactions would be free, but now you are almost always required to pay a fee to get miners interested in adding you to the block
do you actually need to form a new block to computationally verify a transaction?
i thought reaching consensus is the most expensive/wasteful part, rather than the actual computational operations required to verify any given transaction?
yes that transaction will contribute a minute fraction of a percentage to the carbon cost of the next (and arguably subsequent) block(s). but in that sense, and considering the increased per-block carbon footprint of mining each new block, is it really the case that eg. a “worthy” transaction which makes use of previously spent carbon isn’t at least making something of worth happen as a result of that carbon which has already been spent?
or is it really the case that the substantial carbon cost which has already been poured into eg. btc can never do ANY good at all? if so what would be an advised recovery plan to make sure the previously spent carbon doesn’t go to waste? basically develop a truly green currency and transfer the ‘worth’ of BTC to it at 1:1? or any other ways to do it? i’m just thinking out loud here…
I’m pretty sure transactions are verified by mining, so its the same process.
ahh i get you, thats fair. the consensus is expensive