Lol, @Vattenfall_Se, Sweden’s own *state-owned* power company (Sweden’s absolutely largest fossil-free energy producer) just completely rejected the notion—put forth by our financial regulator and environmental protection agency 2 days ago—of bitcoin mining’s wastefulness.
Instead, they talked about how crypto mining was an excellent ”buffer” in energy production that is highly useful for controllable load management and a way to monetize excess energy which would otherwise go to waste.
Their stance is that this actually strengthens the power grid, not siphons from it.
That’s from Sweden’s own 100+ year-old state-owned power company.
They also hinted that if @finansinsp (our Financial Supervisory Authority) and @naturvardsverk (Environmental Protection Agency) actually cared about the environment it would be a misguided choice to ban crypto mining *here* where we actually have lots of green energy.
Their thesis is that if countries with great access and infrastructure to harvest fossil-free fuel were to ban crypto mining, crypto mining will happen in countries and from sources with much worse CO2 emissions. So banning it here would be shooting nature in the foot.
Hilarious. This is from our national public news broadcast yesterday, @svtnyheter, they asked a representant from @naturvardsverk (Environmental Protection Agency):
@svtnyheter: ”How do you know this is going to cause a problem? @Vattenfall_Se disagrees with your description.”
@naturvardsverk: ”We haven’t discussed it with them, but...”
@Bjorn_Risinger do you have any idea how poorly researched this makes you and @finansinsp article look? You did not even ask our own state-owned power company before issuing guidance on power production related matters?
Not only did you recommend Sweden to frontrun EU legislation based on yours and Erik Thedéen’s armchair googling, you even had the cheek to *issue guidance to the EU* based on it?
This is me still staying outside of the Swedish cryptocurrency energy debate.
Will not spend one more hour on this until discussion participants acknowledge this is a multi-faceted issue with pros/cons that requires a level of depth of analysis before taking a hard-lined stance
In the clip the @naturvardsverk rep also says ”our experts have identified that there are ways to do cryptocurrency mining that requires 99.5% less energy and we think bitcoin miners should use this”
I’m not gonna fault the guy for this comment but yeah 😛
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I own this NFT that gives you a free dinner with the Chief Protocol Architect of $AVAX, @kevinsekniqi.
It's currently on the X-chain. I want to transfer it to the C-chain if there are any good UIs for people to place bids/take offers for NFTs there? Any suggestions?
What's cool about this NFT is that you don't need to buy it just because you want to eat dinner with @kevinsekniqi. You can buy it because you expect the demand (and therefore the value) of a dinner with @kevinsekniqi will be higher in the future. It's basically a social token!
Side-question: Am I personally turning this NFT into a security right now by giving you an expectation of profit? @kevinsekniqi issued it and transferred it for free and didn't create any expectations when he issued it. But am I myself committing a crime by marketing it as such?
Technically it’s not built yet and it’s a USD-denominated bond (not a bitcoin-denominated bond) but the loan is used to buy bitcoin and invest in/fund Bitcoin City
I don’t know what I think about the whole authoritarianish gov building a honey pot of crypto wealthy in a country with one of the highest murder rates on the planet but I do love volcanoes and volcano-powered cities & the Sovereign Individual touch where govs compete for people
ETH is priced as if it can flip BTC (% of BTC mcap)
ETH-killers are priced as if they can flip ETH (% of ETH mcap)
Even though they aren’t optimized as monetary assets
And nobody knows what the value for “smart contract fuel” is..
..when they’re supposed to solve high fees...
There’s a monetary premium here that’s being broadbrushed all over everything that’s on CoinGecko.
Most of it is just valued by association (in relation to something else) even though those links don’t really survive when they’re interlinked in two, three, questionable steps
I’m not complaining but FA is completely broken at this point
Everyone complains exchanges aren’t enabling Lightning withdrawals/deposits & the narrative seems to be that ”exchanges don’t want to admit bitcoin scales!/they’re busy listing shitcoins” and then @binance integrates @arbitrum Ethereum L2 straight out of the box what’s that about
Binance has every incentive to pretend Ethereum doesn’t scale since it leads to tons of trading volume in other competing L1s, including their very own Binance Smart Chain geth-fork, which they’ve been trying to steer people toward heavily on their withdrawal page interface.
Maybe it’s because all you need to withdraw to an Ethereum L2 is an Ethereum address, no set-up or inbound liquidity needed, and that Ethereum L2s can do large transfers just fine and don’t need to worry about routes?
Sweden's financial regulator just released an article in which the director-general concludes that if cryptocurrency mining via Proof-of-Work is allowed in Sweden, we'll run out of renewable energy and endanger our chances of meeting our Paris Agreement climate responsibilities.
He reached this conclusion by, according to my read, googling @DigiEconomist and @CambridgeAltFin stats by himself and the director-general of the Environmental Protection Agency. They now recommend that the EU starts an investigation to "ban Proof-of-Work mining".
They also conclude that there are other ways to mine cryptocurrency which wastes 99.95% less energy and maintains the *same* functionality.
Making a high-throughput L1 to reduce gas cost is a bit like making a road wider to reduce traffic
In reality, the wider road makes more people think ”oh I can take my car to work now instead of commuting!” => traffic re-clogs => it takes exactly as long to get to work as before
In reality, a wider road does not reduce the time it takes to get to work. It only allows more people to endure the same level of traffic at the same time.
What you need in order to solve the traffic problem is more roads, coming in from different directions to the city.
Intuition: if everyone had their own road into the city, there would be no traffic.