Crypto Currency Thread
Discussion
NickCQ said:
I really don’t agree with this. Energy is a scarce resource and the production of electricity has massive negative externalities (ie climate change) that we would do well to avoid.
Energy is certainly not a scarce resource. Energy is abundant. It is the stuff of the universe. The scarcity is lack of innovation to capture and distribute that energy efficiently. Human progress can ultimately be defined as, and simplified to, an ever increasing use of energy, from the very first use of fire when we were cavemen. Reduce energy use and you turn civilisation backwards. If you could capture sunlight falling on the planet for a couple of minutes, you'd have enough fuel for all electricity needs, plus all building light & heat, plus all car fuel for a year. Negative externalities on solar, geothermal and hydro are close to zero. They are very low for nuclear, too.
Energy and human progress are inextricably linked. Increasing efficiency of energy production is part of that progress.
Behemoth said:
Reduce energy use and you turn civilisation backwards.
Energy and human progress are inextricably linked. Increasing efficiency of energy production is part of that progress.
Not at all, the UK has been reducing its energy use for years as better technology allows us to use energy more efficiently. Energy and human progress are inextricably linked. Increasing efficiency of energy production is part of that progress.
I really dont buy your arguments that just becuase its there we can use it frivolously - those tonnes of cheap coal in China can be burnt now for bitcoin mining, or be burnt later for something more valuable, or never burnt at all.
Equating cost and price with value is a misnomer.... Bitcoin has a cost, but no value, while the Eastern European lady looking after old folks in a people's home earns less than average wage, but most people would consider her work valuable.
Condi said:
Not at all, the UK has been reducing its energy use for years as better technology allows us to use energy more efficiently.
I really dont buy your arguments that just becuase its there we can use it frivolously - those tonnes of cheap coal in China can be burnt now for bitcoin mining, or be burnt later for something more valuable, or never burnt at all.
Equating cost and price with value is a misnomer.... Bitcoin has a cost, but no value, while the Eastern European lady looking after old folks in a people's home earns less than average wage, but most people would consider her work valuable.
The value of something is whatever society decides to give it. You don't get to personally decide. You pay the market price unless you discover an asymmetry of which others are unaware.I really dont buy your arguments that just becuase its there we can use it frivolously - those tonnes of cheap coal in China can be burnt now for bitcoin mining, or be burnt later for something more valuable, or never burnt at all.
Equating cost and price with value is a misnomer.... Bitcoin has a cost, but no value, while the Eastern European lady looking after old folks in a people's home earns less than average wage, but most people would consider her work valuable.
I clearly pointed out that efficiency is part of progress. There's an incredibly good book on energy & the progress of civilisation by Vaclav Smil. In it, he writes "energy is the only universal currency".
Behemoth said:
The value of something is whatever society decides to give it. You don't get to personally decide. You pay the market price unless you discover an asymmetry of which others are unaware.
The price of something is what 2 people are prepared to buy and sell it at. The value of something is a personal decision.
EG my CFD with Dimots - he thought the price of $6700 represented good value, and I thought it was over-valued. The price and value of things changes over time, but dont for 1 second think the 2 are the same.
Condi said:
The price of something is what 2 people are prepared to buy and sell it at.
The value of something is a personal decision.
EG my CFD with Dimots - he thought the price of $6700 represented good value, and I thought it was over-valued. The price and value of things changes over time, but dont for 1 second think the 2 are the same.
Sure, you may value something more than others and pay a different price. Collectively this activity lands society with a market valuation for things that can be grouped together. I think we're splitting hairs here.The value of something is a personal decision.
EG my CFD with Dimots - he thought the price of $6700 represented good value, and I thought it was over-valued. The price and value of things changes over time, but dont for 1 second think the 2 are the same.
Back to the topic at hand: do you send in the electricity police to force Americans into switching off their xmas lights? Or do you let society progress with innovations to make festivities more efficient?
We're not splitting hairs at all, the difference between price and value is a fundamental point of trading or investing in anything.
But anyway, there is no way I am going to agree that 'securing the block chain' is a sensible use of energy, no matter what value other people may put on it. Especially when the amount of energy is so large, and the rewards (in terms of usefulness to society) are so small.
But anyway, there is no way I am going to agree that 'securing the block chain' is a sensible use of energy, no matter what value other people may put on it. Especially when the amount of energy is so large, and the rewards (in terms of usefulness to society) are so small.
Condi said:
We're not splitting hairs at all, the difference between price and value is a fundamental point of trading or investing in anything.
But anyway, there is no way I am going to agree that 'securing the block chain' is a sensible use of energy, no matter what value other people may put on it. Especially when the amount of energy is so large, and the rewards (in terms of usefulness to society) are so small.
That's fine. The market will decide what society's valuation of bitcoin is. It'll take quite a long time, much further than your short term bet horizons. Meanwhile, are you sending in the electricity police to switch off American xmas lights? Doesn't seem to be a sensible or useful use of energy at all. But anyway, there is no way I am going to agree that 'securing the block chain' is a sensible use of energy, no matter what value other people may put on it. Especially when the amount of energy is so large, and the rewards (in terms of usefulness to society) are so small.
Bit of a bounce today, maybe I caught the bottom bang on target this time... 
Jokes aside there's some very interesting comments and discussion on this thread at the moment. I wonder if it takes the hammering of the market to shake of all the nonesense and leave open and honest debate.
It will be interesting to come back to threads like this. I recently came across a thread debating wether a 964 911 was a worthwhile investment. I believe the thread was from 2002, some amazing foresight from some. It could really have gone either way couldn't it. Those 10k 964 SC models could have been forced off the road with emissions laws, interest rates may have risen instead of fallen, classics may not have become an investment if a global recession had spiked interest from far and wide. We look at the prices of these cars now and it's easy to imagine that's how old porsche values play out over time. But the truth is there's been an incredible amount of influence from many different sides. I expect the whole story of crypto will be an Interesting one in time.
Jokes aside there's some very interesting comments and discussion on this thread at the moment. I wonder if it takes the hammering of the market to shake of all the nonesense and leave open and honest debate.
It will be interesting to come back to threads like this. I recently came across a thread debating wether a 964 911 was a worthwhile investment. I believe the thread was from 2002, some amazing foresight from some. It could really have gone either way couldn't it. Those 10k 964 SC models could have been forced off the road with emissions laws, interest rates may have risen instead of fallen, classics may not have become an investment if a global recession had spiked interest from far and wide. We look at the prices of these cars now and it's easy to imagine that's how old porsche values play out over time. But the truth is there's been an incredible amount of influence from many different sides. I expect the whole story of crypto will be an Interesting one in time.
Behemoth said:
Energy is certainly not a scarce resource. Energy is abundant. It is the stuff of the universe. The scarcity is lack of innovation to capture and distribute that energy efficiently.
Human progress can ultimately be defined as, and simplified to, an ever increasing use of energy, from the very first use of fire when we were cavemen. Reduce energy use and you turn civilisation backwards. If you could capture sunlight falling on the planet for a couple of minutes, you'd have enough fuel for all electricity needs, plus all building light & heat, plus all car fuel for a year. Negative externalities on solar, geothermal and hydro are close to zero. They are very low for nuclear, too.
Energy and human progress are inextricably linked. Increasing efficiency of energy production is part of that progress.
Did you actually write this and believe what you just wrote?Human progress can ultimately be defined as, and simplified to, an ever increasing use of energy, from the very first use of fire when we were cavemen. Reduce energy use and you turn civilisation backwards. If you could capture sunlight falling on the planet for a couple of minutes, you'd have enough fuel for all electricity needs, plus all building light & heat, plus all car fuel for a year. Negative externalities on solar, geothermal and hydro are close to zero. They are very low for nuclear, too.
Energy and human progress are inextricably linked. Increasing efficiency of energy production is part of that progress.
Within the last month, i've read on the BBC that most hydro damns built recently have been massively negative on their surroundings, as well as this week's report that the reprocessing plant at Sellafield has generated revenues of 8bn in it's life, and will take over 5bn and 40-50 years to decomission. No way that 8bn revenue was at 70% margin so whats the odds of the company that did it finishing the job?
Impact next to zero? Birdscustard.jpg
Meanwhile in the last post you are extolling the greatness of bitcoin using cheap chinese power, the same week as another damning BBC report on how China is doing huge coal based power station expansion across the globe and not 1 has carbon capture tech.
I realise that you believe in bitcoin and believe it has value - but you can't simply bend reality and present it as fact in order to promote the platform. Doing so only reduces the credibility of the other points that you make.
Behemoth said:
Mining takes a lot of energy, but it isn't wasted. It secures the ledger. The effort put in is directly related to value.
What a load of crap. Just because money was expended on energy doesn't give the thing value. Using a crap anology, If I bought some super duper special, clear anything, laxative costing £100 and then took a super dump, that some how secures the value of my internal guts and that directly relates to the value of my dump (being somewhere in the region of £100).
Just like my super dump, crypto is a big steaming pile.
PS - my white paper for the superdump coin will be released shortly.
Edited by MWM3 on Wednesday 28th November 18:08
Yep have to agree with the above post. Energy may be in abundance but the technology to harness and deliver it certainly isn't easy or cheap both in terms of cost or impact to the environment. Current "clean" power methods aren't enough to power everything. Coal and Oil are damaging to the environment, may be causing global warming and will run out one day. Nuclear is still probably on the only long term viable option right now except it's very unpopular as no one wants a nuclear power plant in their back yard.
In fact we are pretty much heading towards a bit of an energy crisis as demand is rising exponentially and we have no clean, easy way to meet it. Unless someone invents fusion or another truly clean form of energy in the next couple of decades we could be in for a rough time.
In fact we are pretty much heading towards a bit of an energy crisis as demand is rising exponentially and we have no clean, easy way to meet it. Unless someone invents fusion or another truly clean form of energy in the next couple of decades we could be in for a rough time.
That's what gave my concerns, literally burning resources away 24-7 to"mine" something that doesn't exist and has no real intrinsic value.
Energy is finite (even the sun!) and China/others polluting the globe because it has little regulation on power stations surely can't be right, the rest of us are having taxes imposed on fuels etc just to travel !
Energy is finite (even the sun!) and China/others polluting the globe because it has little regulation on power stations surely can't be right, the rest of us are having taxes imposed on fuels etc just to travel !
Some Gump said:
Within the last month, i've read on the BBC that most hydro damns built recently have been massively negative on their surroundings, as well as this week's report that the reprocessing plant at Sellafield has generated revenues of 8bn in it's life, and will take over 5bn and 40-50 years to decomission. No way that 8bn revenue was at 70% margin so whats the odds of the company that did it finishing the job?
Impact next to zero? Birdscustard.jpg
Meanwhile in the last post you are extolling the greatness of bitcoin using cheap chinese power, the same week as another damning BBC report on how China is doing huge coal based power station expansion across the globe and not 1 has carbon capture tech.
I did not extol bitcoin mining using Chinese coal. I was pointing out assymetries.Impact next to zero? Birdscustard.jpg
Meanwhile in the last post you are extolling the greatness of bitcoin using cheap chinese power, the same week as another damning BBC report on how China is doing huge coal based power station expansion across the globe and not 1 has carbon capture tech.
There's no doubt that the threat of climate change would recede if more nuclear power and hydro were adopted. You can't eliminate side effects to energy production but you can decide which is the better side effect.
Guvernator said:
Is this a proper turnaround or a dead cat bounce? I guess we'll see in a few days. Either way it's far too risky for me to invest anymore at this point. As was stated earlier, buy the confirmed bull but I am in no way convinced it is that at the moment.
I agree. It could well end up a repeat of Feb's cat & trap. If you trade it, you need to keep a close eye on it. I don't think the trend will necessarily reveal itself in days. It could take many weeks.Guvernator said:
Is this a proper turnaround or a dead cat bounce? I guess we'll see in a few days. Either way it's far too risky for me to invest anymore at this point. As was stated earlier, buy the confirmed bull but I am in no way convinced it is that at the moment.
Confirmed by who? There's a million voices with an agenda. Who is going to confirm anything to you? It's volatile in the extreme. You are always going to be taking a punt to a degree. Depending on your view on price action the recent bottom at about 3800 or so could be a decent level to bounce off or a level of structure that, if broken, could mean a re-trace back down to about 2600.
May be worth seeing if / when it goes to 5000, which was a level of resistance back in September last year, and making a decision from there.
May be worth seeing if / when it goes to 5000, which was a level of resistance back in September last year, and making a decision from there.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff