Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
WHITE HOUSE TO CRAFT BITCOIN MINING POLICY ADDRESSING ENERGY USE: REPORT
The Biden administration is reportedly crafting policies intended to lower energy consumption and emissions from bitcoin mining.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/white-house-to-reduce-bitcoin-energy-use-report
The Biden administration is reportedly crafting policies intended to lower energy consumption and emissions from bitcoin mining.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/white-house-to-reduce-bitcoin-energy-use-report
It will be no less than an attack. Bitcoin screws with the plan. They need to hobble it.
It's cute they think they can.
It is an attack. Please don’t be so complacent. Yes, they can—if complacent Bitcoiners do not act to stop them!
Don’t take my word for it. If you admire Ted Cruz, then watch the full video of Cruz’s May 23 speech (the original, not the botched edit you criticized). Cruz says a few things that I find debatable; but he made some incisive points.
Near the end of his speech, Cruz warned Bitcoiners to remember Napster. Although his analogy is imprecise due to Bitcoin’s greater decentralization, it is nonetheless a good and insightful analogy. Cruz is alarmed, as I am, about Bitcoiners’ naïveté and complacency.
cAPSLOCK, Senator Cruz was talking to you (transcription is mine):
Quote from: Ted Cruz
[21:50] I think Bitcoin, and crypto generally, has the potential to demonstrate and to generate enormous returns across the country. But I also believe the government can screw it up.
I’ll say I’ve spent more and more time lately talking to folks in the Bitcoin community and crypto community. And I do think there is a little bit of a Utopian naïveté among folks in those worlds, who believe in a [inaudible] said, “We are inevitable.” Well, maybe. But they may have thought that in China.
Government has enormous ability to screw things up. And I don’t know how many of y’all have your El Salvadorean passports. But the U.S. Federal government screwing it up will be massively destructive. [23:02]
[...]
[25:25] ...by the way, how many of y’all remember Napster? You know, Napster was unstoppable, it was inevitable, until—boom! It was obliterated.
And so if we see the potential for what Bitcoin represents—if we see the optimism—we need to be vigilant, not to destroy it. [25:52]
I’ll say I’ve spent more and more time lately talking to folks in the Bitcoin community and crypto community. And I do think there is a little bit of a Utopian naïveté among folks in those worlds, who believe in a [inaudible] said, “We are inevitable.” Well, maybe. But they may have thought that in China.
Government has enormous ability to screw things up. And I don’t know how many of y’all have your El Salvadorean passports. But the U.S. Federal government screwing it up will be massively destructive. [23:02]
[...]
[25:25] ...by the way, how many of y’all remember Napster? You know, Napster was unstoppable, it was inevitable, until—boom! It was obliterated.
And so if we see the potential for what Bitcoin represents—if we see the optimism—we need to be vigilant, not to destroy it. [25:52]
Be vigilant. I second that. A large-scale, highly organized attack on Bitcoin is not “cute”.
On another note: I like how Cruz speaks of “Bitcoin and crypto”. When he speaks of Bitcoin, he says “Bitcoin”; when he speaks of cryptocurrency generally, he says “Bitcoin and crypto”. His usage is consistent. He clearly understands the distinction, and he puts Bitcoin first; but he expresses a balanced view that is not hostile to altcoins.
P.S., off-topic and very annoying to me:
Wait... why is Nullius using a sock puppet? That is nullius, right?
I will not comment on speculation about my identity, but I must object to your use of the term “sock puppet”. You evidently don’t know what it means.
Sock-puppetry is not merely the use of multiple pseudonyms. Although their policies are much more negative towards alt accounts than the Bitcoin Forum’s policies, Wikipedia’s official policy explanation of sock-puppetry is pretty good.
Sock-puppetry is the deceptive use of alternate identities to manipulate a discussion. It typically takes the form of holding public conversations with oneself, creating nonexistent supporters to cheer for one’s own position, creating nonexistent stupid opponents as strawmen to rebut in fake debates, or creating new “supporters” to continue the argument after one’s account is banned (ban evasion). It is called “sock-puppetry” by analogy to a puppet show put on by one person using lowbrow, homemade puppets made of socks.
That is a very serious accusation. It goes far beyond idle speculation on my identity—and it is obviously untrue! I presume that you misspoke.