Im interested in cryptos, because it could serve as a foundation for an internet funded by people and communities. A crypto that protects people’s privacy and has a low energy cost.
But is this enough to make it ethical? Are there other aspects to take into concideration? Or is ethical cryptos possible?
In particular Im looking into Mobilecoin which Signal has integrated into their app.
I’ll let people smarter than myself answer your questions, but as for Mobilecoin: stay far, far away. It’s just Monero, but rebranded for Signal. In addition, if Signal’s company ever goes belly-up, so will the coin, instantly.
Agreed. IIRC, though they call the currency “carbon-negative” or whatever, they actually just pay some company to plant trees for them. That doesn’t make it a ‘green currency’.
Apparently they both consume way less energy than PoW and PoS cryptos, and invest in solar plants in India that produce more energy back, hance having a negative balance.
What is it that you would call a green currency?
That’s an interesting premise, that somehow a currency is going to change the nature of how “the internet” is funded. So, none of the world’s currencies have done this, but a “currency” that isn’t really a currency is going to change around the entire economics of everything online?
There’s so many fun presumptions in that notion that it’s hard to even start a discussion.
The short answer is no. I think there’s more than enough evidence out there that cryptocurrencies will remain niche, and this ridiculous ‘web3’ notion of every interaction being a transaction will simply just not occur, much as any bros try and wish and argue for it.
I’ve been looking with interest at oxen.io for a while now. I’m not convinced yet, but I think it has promise. It uses the CryptoNote protocol, the same that Monero uses, so it’s as anonymous as can be. However, it uses PoS instead of PoW, making it faster and much more eco-friendly. Their staking cost is quite high, requiring 15,000 OXEN, but to be fair this is much lower than other coins like Ethereum. Oxen also powers other private platforms - Lokinet, a Tor alternative, and Session, a decentralized private messenger which routes its messages through Lokinet.
deleted by creator
I think it’s perfectly possible to create a cryptocurrency that doesn’t hurt the environment too bad (from the perspective of the technology). However blockchains/cryptocurrencies have other flaws, mostly by design. Since they’re not democratic but libertarian, I don’t see a future where everyone uses cryptocurrencies and we’re saving our planet. There’s way too much for-profit motivation behind the ideology and technology of cryptos.
deleted by creator
Cryptocurrencies is the future, one way or another.
We need to get rid of traditional banking, improve the blockchain process and find a way to block mining, then we are much more efficient than traditional banking because you can easily do thousand transactions within milliseconds without depending on external middle mans.
My idea is that Govt. takes over cryptocurrencies and that traditional banks monitor and improve the system. So you still have your bank, the govt is happy because they can monitor potential fraud and we get a more privacy respecting system.
The entire ponzi scheme discussion only stands and falls with mining. If that is out of the equation then we are pretty much ready to go, China uses their app, so there is no hard cash anymore and it works pretty well for them.
deleted by creator
Yes, if we just eliminate all the flaws of crypto, crypto is the perfect currency. Just like if we eliminate all the flaws of capitalism, it’s the perfect system.
This community is about green and not capitalism, consumerism, monopolies etc pp. I did explained the major issue and there is no one who actually tried to workaround this, because the system is considerable new and the original proposal was never meant to be abused the way people doing it. People just getting started, the research on this started, LH2 looks promising but needs more testing on a bigger scale and then you still need to solve a few things.
No one here btw claimed its the perfect system my words are … it is the future one way or another.
Your own words right…
Can I see your proposal, protocol, research etc to improve it. NOPE, so lets move on.
Even in the future when all bitcoins have been mined, the idea is that miners continue to calculate hashes for the blocks, and that they are compensated for that via transaction fees.
There are some ideas I have like e.g. putting a threshold on it. nVidia had the idea to limit mining trough firmware, with less success but I do not want people abusing every hardware to quickly making a buck on behalf of the environment. You do not even need to block it, making it unattractive is enough to piss of miner.
… presumably government involvement would also wish to control the supply of (virtual) currency much like it does today to attempt to control inflation. The mechanism that they’d use for that would look much like mining (just that only they’d be allowed to do it).
Without govt there is abuse, we saw this and without control, inspection the abuse will continue, we have the current dilemma because people scam, and they hide behind the system. I rather trust my bank than you with my money, nothing personal, would say the same about everyone.
deleted by creator
Yeah, claims. Give me 5 bucks and I also claim I found aliens.
Also getting rid of everything, in the name of broader terms is not how society works. Thankfully I might add.
Digital Yuan is not based on blockchain
It is about the principle, you replace hard cash. Also this is not entirely right since there are plans to integrate a blockchain but right-now there are not much green alternatives.
One way or another it supports my point because centralized systems are even less efficient, as explained.
Cryptocurrency != digital currency
Digital currency + each transaction encrypted and obscured = cryptocurrency
I’m surprised at your comment and its willingness to consider cryptocurrency, but I’m not sure that I understand how one might come to the conclusion that the mining portion of it needs to be eliminated. Granted, I am aware of the environmental concerns… but any solution that addresses those concerns will still look alot like mining, only it will have become energy efficient enough that this is no longer a problem.
Even in the future when all bitcoins have been mined, the idea is that miners continue to calculate hashes for the blocks, and that they are compensated for that via transaction fees. If somehow that weren’t required (for whatever reason), presumably government involvement would also wish to control the supply of (virtual) currency much like it does today to attempt to control inflation. The mechanism that they’d use for that would look much like mining (just that only they’d be allowed to do it).
Add on to that “traditional bank involvement”, and we’ve basically reinvented the system that we have now… one where there is no privacy, from the government or private corporations, one where they get to meddle in the supply of currency, where that currency is virtual/digital.
There are other technologies than blockchain or bitcoin. Bitcoin is completely inefficient. There are much better coins that are sustainable
There are much better coins that are sustainable
But, having removed “mining” and privacy from them, what do they have to offer? For that matter, how are they different than the electronic ledgers that banks already currently use?
He didn’t just suggest that the blockchain and inefficiency be resolved, but all the other qualities that actually make cryptocurrencies worthwhile.
