@feld You're addressing to different, though real and relevant problems.
One is under-pricing of fossil carbon fuels. Another is general inequality and inequity, as well as the age-old conflict between _rents_ incomes vs. _wages_ incomes. The rentiers generally win, the wage-earners generally lose.
There are additional taxes you want to impose on the 1%, but you _still_ have to make fossil fuels pay full freight.
@feld First off, the issue in question was *electrical energy* not *petrol fuel*, as very few crypto-mining rigs burn petrol. For the fundamental reason expressed: IT'S TOO DAMNED EXPENSIVE.
Crypto mining is a COMPLETELY economically-driven process: the viability of crypto mining is driven by fixed and marginal costs, and the market price of bitcoins.
(I'm not even getting to the point that that market is completely whack, though read David Gerard's excellent book and anslysis.)
@feld I'll leave you with my favourite quote of Karl Marx:
"Wealth, as Mr Hobbes says, is power."
Except I lied.
That's not Marx, he didn't say it.
Adam Smith. Wealth of Nations. Which is _not_ a perfect book. But there's a lot in it you might want to actually read.
(And you can believe that Marx read Smith.)
@feld So, yes, bulk power prices are _another_ issue, but let's keep straight what we've been discussing in this thread so far:
1. The power costs of distributing gobs of Jquery copies around the 'Net, relative to total WWII explosive yield (a possibly misleading comparison, but let's skip that quibble).
2. The power consumption and impacts of cryptocurrency mining.
3. The _impacts_ of power generation generally, and fossil fuels specifically.
4. Transport fuels.
@feld It turns out that those are at the very least _somewhat_ independent things, and if you want to address them, it helps to understand how they interrelate, economically and otherwise.
To take a tangent: getting this wrong is like someone asking if the computer is slow because there's too much mail on the hard drive. To a first approximation, and probably a 3rd to 5th, the answer is "no". And in fact the answer is "the question makes no sense".
So I'll turn this back over to you...
@feld What specifically is the problem you're looking at, why do you see it as a problem, and what are you proposing to do about it?
Because so far, there's been no clear statement or agreement on any of this.
(And I've muted the party who kept wanting to argue with me over what they'd wished I'd said rather than what I'd actually said.)
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!