Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Is this for real?
by
wxa7115
on 15/03/2022, 17:09:37 UTC
So even if PoW requires more energy it should still be the way to secure a network, and since bitcoin is using it and it will not be replaced then those politicians will fail at implementing something like that as the reality of the situation will never match with their expectations.
It is the reality that those politicians who will implement to ban pow or bitcoin, they'll just fail in the end. The network is making it secured through pow and those that like to impose it because "it consumes too much energy" don't really understand what it is all about.
There's an alternative to this problem if that's what they're addressing, there are alternative energy sources that have been done by huge mining farms if the main concern is all about the consumption and effect of it as it requires a huge amount of energy.
Correct, which is why something like this makes no sense at all, bitcoin mining already uses a great deal of energy which came from renewable sources so it was probably one of the cleanest industries in that aspect that we could find.

Governments know this so this is not something they can use to directly attack bitcoin or their lies would be exposed relatively quickly, so they are just arguing that the energy consumption of bitcoin and other POW coins is too high and something must be done about it, which obviously includes banning and other regulatory measures, which is what they were aiming for from the beginning.
They already put ahold of this bill for now, maybe it's because of the ongoing war in Europe. Anyways, the people behind this initiative is not really familiar with bitcoin mining, Maybe they just heard it from someone else or just read it in the internet. Because we all know that their argument is really flawed and there are a lot of industries, far greater than bitcoin mining that really affects the environment. Even banking system consumes a lot of electricity per year as compare to bitcoin.
The truth is that politicians field of expertise is politics and not science or technology, which means that most of the things they try to regulate are things they do not understand, so a great deal of them just go with the most popular opinions so they have an opportunity to be reelected or their party remains in power.

However there are many industries that cannot be regulated this way and they need experts that know the topic deeply and then they need to follow their recommendations, but when they see an industry like this one that threatens their power then they will try to do what they can to keep that power, producing nonsensical propositions, just like this one.