Bitcoin isn't planning to switch to proof of stake is it? Meaning it will continue to be mined and contribute to massive power use? Seems antithetical to an electric car company from an...
Bitcoin isn't planning to switch to proof of stake is it? Meaning it will continue to be mined and contribute to massive power use? Seems antithetical to an electric car company from an environmental perspective, but maybe I'm overestimating the impact?
I agree it is very hypocritical when they could be looking towards a greener alternative but I listened to a good podcast on the subject, and while BTC does generate a massive carbon footprint,...
I agree it is very hypocritical when they could be looking towards a greener alternative but I listened to a good podcast on the subject, and while BTC does generate a massive carbon footprint, most people don't realize the massive carbon footprint of the internet itself. Even streaming a song on Spotify or Apple Music takes its toll. I believe this was the podcast: https://irlpodcast.org/season5/episode3/ great series.
I don't think when huge numbers like that get cited it is about the comparison, but more that BTC is a wholly unnecessary. The computations done to mine a new block serve no real purpose. There...
I don't think when huge numbers like that get cited it is about the comparison, but more that BTC is a wholly unnecessary. The computations done to mine a new block serve no real purpose. There are smarter ways to do the same thing.
Though your numbers help put things into perspective. I wonder how much electricity BTC would consume if it were to suddenly replace the global banking system, that'd be a much better comparison I think.
Ethereum 2.0 has proof of stake. It's already live on one shard, but themmain network is still proof of work. I think they're expecting to fully move away from proof of work in 2022. There's some...
Ethereum 2.0 has proof of stake. It's already live on one shard, but themmain network is still proof of work. I think they're expecting to fully move away from proof of work in 2022.
... Did people stop using bitcoin as a currency? Honest question. I had some friends who use to use bitcoin to buy <redacted> but they've since gone to rehab so I haven't paid attention to crypto...
... Did people stop using bitcoin as a currency? Honest question. I had some friends who use to use bitcoin to buy <redacted> but they've since gone to rehab so I haven't paid attention to crypto at all since then. Obviously Tesla wants to push people to use it as a currency, but has the use of bitcoin as a currency mostly stopped and people are just holding hoping for another opportunity to cash out and get rich?
Matt Levine speculated about other companies doing this in today's column: [...] It seems like a pretty tempting way to cause another financial collapse when it all ends in tears.
Here’s my advice to Apple, though: If you are going to announce that Apple Wallet will now be a crypto exchange, you should buy Bitcoins first. Apple has close to $200 billion of cash and marketable securities; you gotta put at least tens of billions of dollars into Bitcoin. Then you put out a press release like “we’ve thought about it for a while and it’s the official position of Apple that Bitcoin is the good money now, everyone should use Bitcoin.” Then the price of Bitcoin like … really really really predictably doubles immediately? Then you could sell some of your holdings for a huge easy profit, though you might want to hang on to some of them for when the next giant company does this and it doubles again.
I should never be allowed near a public company; isn’t financial engineering so much more fun than, like, making phones?
[...]
Basically we are in a time, for Bitcoin, where mainstream acceptance is the obvious catalyst to drive the price higher [...] If you are in a position to provide that mainstream acceptance—if you are a giant normal mainstream company whose acceptance of Bitcoin would be big news—then you are in a position to profit from it.
It seems like a pretty tempting way to cause another financial collapse when it all ends in tears.
They provide stock, which given Tesla's recent performance is much better. Long run it could either mean a lot wealthy employees or a lot of disappointed ones when the market no longer sees Tesla...
They provide stock, which given Tesla's recent performance is much better. Long run it could either mean a lot wealthy employees or a lot of disappointed ones when the market no longer sees Tesla as the darling it has become.
There’s no reason a company like Tesla can’t do both. Especially given Tesla’s history of overworking their employees, helping set them up for retirement is the least they can do.
There’s no reason a company like Tesla can’t do both. Especially given Tesla’s history of overworking their employees, helping set them up for retirement is the least they can do.
I've seen a lot of what I'd categorize as fear-mongering articles on Bitcoin's energy consumption over the past couple of years, and more recently in the past week (probably due to this purchase)....
I've seen a lot of what I'd categorize as fear-mongering articles on Bitcoin's energy consumption over the past couple of years, and more recently in the past week (probably due to this purchase). Can someone in the know speak to this?
It seems to me as a classic case of missing the forest for the trees, no? I keep seeing comparisons drawn to the energy consumption of small countries that I feel are misrepresentative of Bitcoin's actual-factual effect on the climate and don't consider other stocks or industries for comparison.
I’m not sure what the actual numbers are right now, but why do you feel they are misrepresentative? As the value of Bitcoin increases or the value of a given kWh decreases you need to light...
I’m not sure what the actual numbers are right now, but why do you feel they are misrepresentative?
As the value of Bitcoin increases or the value of a given kWh decreases you need to light increasingly larger shares of the wealth on fire to keep it secure. Whatever the energy consumption for proof of work is now will be dwarfed by the energy required in the future — ‘regular’ financial markets don’t suffer from this problem — their energy cost is ~essentially~ constant.
Somewhat of an aside — the long term value of Bitcoin is murky from my limited perspective. Once Bitcoin is fully mined what is paying for the constant evolution in mining hardware and blockchain security? As technology improves and energy availability increases the chain will cost more to secure. Transactions can’t pay for this alone (or people will flee the currency as transactions eat into increasingly larger portions of their wealth). Either Bitcoin scales in value infinitely in way totally detached from supply and demand as a way to pay for chain security or the entire thing falls flat on its face. Am I missing something here?
I see, it seems I wasn't aware of just how much Bitcoin's energy consumption is set to increase in the coming decades. Those numbers are shocking - 18.5 million out of 21 million Bitcoins have...
I see, it seems I wasn't aware of just how much Bitcoin's energy consumption is set to increase in the coming decades. Those numbers are shocking - 18.5 million out of 21 million Bitcoins have been mined, but the rest likely won't be for another hundred years?
The reason I feel it's misrepresentative is because the articles I've seen focus solely on the electricity consumption and not on the electricity breakdown - how much is coming from renewable / nonrenewable sources. It makes it much harder for me to compare Bitcoin directly to something like transportation infrastructure, or the food industry, or what have you in terms of direct damage being done to the planet.
All electricity usage isn't equally polluting. Bitcoin miners are in competition to find the cheapest electricity they can get anywhere in the world. One way to get it really cheap is to find...
All electricity usage isn't equally polluting. Bitcoin miners are in competition to find the cheapest electricity they can get anywhere in the world. One way to get it really cheap is to find electricity that nobody else can use for some reason and would otherwise be unused.
It could be excess because it's the rainy season or because the needed power lines aren't built yet. Once the power lines are there and there are other customers, the power company can sell the electricity for more money to someone else, so the Bitcoin miners would be priced out.
A lot of Bitcoin mining was happening in Sichuan since it is apparently a mountainous region with a lot of hydroelectric power. I imagine corruption was involved. The Chinese government had told them to shut down, but apparently that's been delayed or reversed? I don't know what's going on now.
The energy usage is huge, enough so that what I would call the other major cryptocurrency, Ethereum, is switching from proof of work mining to proof of stake.
The energy usage is huge, enough so that what I would call the other major cryptocurrency, Ethereum, is switching from proof of work mining to proof of stake.
That’s an interesting point. If Bitcoin is actually creating new wealth (I’m not sure if it is), then maybe we should compare it against other sources of wealth and not against payment processors...
That’s an interesting point. If Bitcoin is actually creating new wealth (I’m not sure if it is), then maybe we should compare it against other sources of wealth and not against payment processors or banks.
Michael Burry (yes, that Michael Burry) says that Tesla's BTC buy is just a distraction from quality issues being investigated in China. Also interesting is that Musk has been flirting with the...
Michael Burry (yes, that Michael Burry) says that Tesla's BTC buy is just a distraction from quality issues being investigated in China.
Also interesting is that Musk has been flirting with the Dogecoin community recently as well.
I hope people are prepared to pay capital gains taxes in the United States when they realize their BTC gains by making a purchase. Nothing like paying (at minimum) an extra 15% to use your "currency."
I hope people are prepared to pay capital gains taxes in the United States when they realize their BTC gains by making a purchase. Nothing like paying (at minimum) an extra 15% to use your "currency."
That means you have gains, though, which means you came out ahead compared to holding cash. Often, if you're paying a lot of taxes, it's a sign that you made a lot of money.
That means you have gains, though, which means you came out ahead compared to holding cash.
Often, if you're paying a lot of taxes, it's a sign that you made a lot of money.
Bartering is a taxable event according to the IRS. You have a taxable gain if the fair market value of the property you receive exceeds the original cost basis. Most people aren't buying Bitcoin...
Bartering is a taxable event according to the IRS. You have a taxable gain if the fair market value of the property you receive exceeds the original cost basis. Most people aren't buying Bitcoin and then immediately using it to buy a good or service, they're holding it over much longer terms with significant capital gains.
Will I recognize a gain or loss if I exchange my virtual currency for other property?
Yes. If you exchange virtual currency held as a capital asset for other property, including for goods or for another virtual currency, you will recognize a capital gain or loss.
How do I calculate my gain or loss when I exchange my virtual currency for other property?
Your gain or loss is the difference between the fair market value of the property you received and your adjusted basis in the virtual currency exchanged.
It's hard to know how to feel about this. On the one hand, it is interesting to see the adoption of bitcoin for its original intention. On the other hand, it feels more like a commodity rather...
It's hard to know how to feel about this. On the one hand, it is interesting to see the adoption of bitcoin for its original intention. On the other hand, it feels more like a commodity rather than currency at this point.
Bitcoin isn't planning to switch to proof of stake is it? Meaning it will continue to be mined and contribute to massive power use? Seems antithetical to an electric car company from an environmental perspective, but maybe I'm overestimating the impact?
I agree it is very hypocritical when they could be looking towards a greener alternative but I listened to a good podcast on the subject, and while BTC does generate a massive carbon footprint, most people don't realize the massive carbon footprint of the internet itself. Even streaming a song on Spotify or Apple Music takes its toll. I believe this was the podcast: https://irlpodcast.org/season5/episode3/ great series.
I don't think when huge numbers like that get cited it is about the comparison, but more that BTC is a wholly unnecessary. The computations done to mine a new block serve no real purpose. There are smarter ways to do the same thing.
Though your numbers help put things into perspective. I wonder how much electricity BTC would consume if it were to suddenly replace the global banking system, that'd be a much better comparison I think.
Ethereum 2.0 has proof of stake. It's already live on one shard, but themmain network is still proof of work. I think they're expecting to fully move away from proof of work in 2022.
There's some info on https://ethereum.org/en/eth2/
... Did people stop using bitcoin as a currency? Honest question. I had some friends who use to use bitcoin to buy <redacted> but they've since gone to rehab so I haven't paid attention to crypto at all since then. Obviously Tesla wants to push people to use it as a currency, but has the use of bitcoin as a currency mostly stopped and people are just holding hoping for another opportunity to cash out and get rich?
Doesn't his dad own an emerald mine that does something similar?
Matt Levine speculated about other companies doing this in today's column:
[...]
It seems like a pretty tempting way to cause another financial collapse when it all ends in tears.
That's actually a really interesting take that I did not think of before.
They provide stock, which given Tesla's recent performance is much better. Long run it could either mean a lot wealthy employees or a lot of disappointed ones when the market no longer sees Tesla as the darling it has become.
There’s no reason a company like Tesla can’t do both. Especially given Tesla’s history of overworking their employees, helping set them up for retirement is the least they can do.
I've seen a lot of what I'd categorize as fear-mongering articles on Bitcoin's energy consumption over the past couple of years, and more recently in the past week (probably due to this purchase). Can someone in the know speak to this?
It seems to me as a classic case of missing the forest for the trees, no? I keep seeing comparisons drawn to the energy consumption of small countries that I feel are misrepresentative of Bitcoin's actual-factual effect on the climate and don't consider other stocks or industries for comparison.
I’m not sure what the actual numbers are right now, but why do you feel they are misrepresentative?
As the value of Bitcoin increases or the value of a given kWh decreases you need to light increasingly larger shares of the wealth on fire to keep it secure. Whatever the energy consumption for proof of work is now will be dwarfed by the energy required in the future — ‘regular’ financial markets don’t suffer from this problem — their energy cost is ~essentially~ constant.
Somewhat of an aside — the long term value of Bitcoin is murky from my limited perspective. Once Bitcoin is fully mined what is paying for the constant evolution in mining hardware and blockchain security? As technology improves and energy availability increases the chain will cost more to secure. Transactions can’t pay for this alone (or people will flee the currency as transactions eat into increasingly larger portions of their wealth). Either Bitcoin scales in value infinitely in way totally detached from supply and demand as a way to pay for chain security or the entire thing falls flat on its face. Am I missing something here?
I see, it seems I wasn't aware of just how much Bitcoin's energy consumption is set to increase in the coming decades. Those numbers are shocking - 18.5 million out of 21 million Bitcoins have been mined, but the rest likely won't be for another hundred years?
The reason I feel it's misrepresentative is because the articles I've seen focus solely on the electricity consumption and not on the electricity breakdown - how much is coming from renewable / nonrenewable sources. It makes it much harder for me to compare Bitcoin directly to something like transportation infrastructure, or the food industry, or what have you in terms of direct damage being done to the planet.
All electricity usage isn't equally polluting. Bitcoin miners are in competition to find the cheapest electricity they can get anywhere in the world. One way to get it really cheap is to find electricity that nobody else can use for some reason and would otherwise be unused.
One possibility is excess hydroelectric power.
It could be excess because it's the rainy season or because the needed power lines aren't built yet. Once the power lines are there and there are other customers, the power company can sell the electricity for more money to someone else, so the Bitcoin miners would be priced out.
A lot of Bitcoin mining was happening in Sichuan since it is apparently a mountainous region with a lot of hydroelectric power. I imagine corruption was involved. The Chinese government had told them to shut down, but apparently that's been delayed or reversed? I don't know what's going on now.
The energy usage is huge, enough so that what I would call the other major cryptocurrency, Ethereum, is switching from proof of work mining to proof of stake.
That’s an interesting point. If Bitcoin is actually creating new wealth (I’m not sure if it is), then maybe we should compare it against other sources of wealth and not against payment processors or banks.
Funnily enough I just came across this: https://yearbook.enerdata.net/electricity/electricity-domestic-consumption-data.html
@streblo
Michael Burry (yes, that Michael Burry) says that Tesla's BTC buy is just a distraction from quality issues being investigated in China.
Also interesting is that Musk has been flirting with the Dogecoin community recently as well.
I hope people are prepared to pay capital gains taxes in the United States when they realize their BTC gains by making a purchase. Nothing like paying (at minimum) an extra 15% to use your "currency."
That means you have gains, though, which means you came out ahead compared to holding cash.
Often, if you're paying a lot of taxes, it's a sign that you made a lot of money.
Absolutely. I'm just concerned about how many people may think they can buy something with Bitcoin and avoid paying taxes on their HODL gains.
Hey, at least you get gains. I wish I could use the inflation on my checkings account as capital loss on my taxes!
Bartering is a taxable event according to the IRS. You have a taxable gain if the fair market value of the property you receive exceeds the original cost basis. Most people aren't buying Bitcoin and then immediately using it to buy a good or service, they're holding it over much longer terms with significant capital gains.
It's crazy to me that US CGT is only 15%!
It was about that in the UK before the 2008 crisis.
It's hard to know how to feel about this. On the one hand, it is interesting to see the adoption of bitcoin for its original intention. On the other hand, it feels more like a commodity rather than currency at this point.