It also sources a ton of terrible data that's been completely disproven.
Adverse Event said:
It also sources a ton of terrible data that's been completely disproven.
Quote:
Think of it this way. If a new industry came along tomorrow with the following properties:
It consumes energy, but it doesn't matter where that energy is produced
It is fully digital, so requires no physical infrastructure aside from electricity, transformers, and a datacenter
It is completely interruptible, and can be curtailed fully at any time, so it could be fully offline whenever the grid needs it (a feature that renewable grids increasingly require)
Because it's fully digital, it can be rendered as sustainable as its electricity inputs, and indeed, by most measures, it appears to be more sustainable than any single other heavy industry in the US
It renders a service giving property rights to the entire world
It buys up low or negatively-priced renewable energy, vastly improving the economics of new and existing renewable projects that would otherwise not be able to monetize
If the industry goes away, the infrastructure built could be repurposed for other location-agnostic uses, like the generation of green hydrogen, a key part of the renewable transition
It mitigates emissions associated with unavoidable gas flaring, a byproduct of oil extraction
It rebuilds a high-energy infrastructure in the heartland of America, laying the groundwork for a desperately needed reshoring of industrial capacity
If you ban it, its aggregate emissions will go up. If you embrace it, its aggregate emissions will go down
If you ban it, you empower your enemies, like Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea.
If you embrace it, you directly hurt them, and give their citizens tools to free themselves from those oppressive regimes.
It represents tens of billions of equity value and offers a massive tax windfall to states that can sell their otherwise unsold energy to the producers of this product
… would you ban this industry? Or would you embrace it?
— Faisal (@RealMentalist) November 8, 2022
ac04 said:
binance buying FTX. ****coinery takes down another billionaire.
LatinAggie1997 said:
It's not drama between Binance (CZ) and FTX (SBF). It is more than just them. The word is out, has been, that SBF is a dem scumbag in bed with dem politicians trying to create (force) a nationak bit license. They want to freeze everyone out and take control.
seems like a strange business model where one company needs to step in to stop another one from going bankrupt.TxAG#2011 said:
Well, crap. This is not good.
The company stepping in literally nuked the other one then swooped in to buy it for pennies on the dollar.LMCane said:seems like a strange business model where one company needs to step in to stop another one from going bankrupt.TxAG#2011 said:
Well, crap. This is not good.
does Wendy's offer free money to McDonalds to ensure their financial success?
AggieMainland said:
Bought BTC at $17.9k. Today is a good day. Ready to buy more on the way down. Lets goooooo
Marsh said:
If this is the beginning of the next down cycle...
Sounds familiar over the last 10 months or so... Down cycles are fun.Quote:
(1) There were points in May and June where I didn't even open my portfolio because of how far negative I was (50% at one point...). I over committed and lost my butt.
I was proud of myself for taking out at least 50% of my portfolio at this point but I re-invested it too soon (even re-investing when coins dropped 20-25% depleted my funds pretty quickly with how much many fell over the past year). Just goes to show that we are still not past the point of some coins taking 90%+ value drops (looking at you SOL and ADA!) from ATH.Quote:
(2) just because you sell, doesn't mean you need to reinvest that money immediately. As of a week ago, 50% of my portfolio had been converted to cash.
Only trust Selfish Billionaires. https://t.co/XNvGzeA2dH
— 🔴₿RITISH HODL (@BritishHodl) November 9, 2022
ac04 said:
regulatory changes are needed. 99% of the garbage in this space are unregistered securities and complete scams.
Luckily the SEC is skilled at regulating tech companies trying to solve different problems and performing different functions.LatinAggie1997 said:Agreed, that regulations are needed. However, regulations created by a new body that truly and deeply understands all aspects of blockchain and digital assets. There are different ecosystems with different tech and protocols trying to solve different problems and perform different functions. The SEC regulating digital assets is like a boxing judge trying to referee an MMA match.ac04 said:
regulatory changes are needed. 99% of the garbage in this space are unregistered securities and complete scams.