The #skullofsatoshi comes from Greenpeace’s campaign for bitcoin to migrate away from proof of work.
Discussion
It’s misinformed and misguided. We cannot give ground to them.
As a Brazillian, who saw the destruction caused by the gold race in indigenous land in the past years and months I am rooting for bitcoin. It is being such a genocide and if the gold would become irrelevant in relation to bitcoin, I guess the whole planet would win. Is possible to find other sources of energy, but the gold exploration destroys ancient trees, starve and kill indigenous, destroy lands and rivers forever. So I am rooting for the internet coin, honestly.
Even more so re: controversial opinions, it kinda feels like a lot of in fighting from both sides. Greenpeace is known in some circles though seldom, if ever, ranks as a top 50 charity in the us re: constituent contributions. Both BC/GP aren’t widely in peoples consciousness.
Wish the piece went more into change the code to _xyz_. Read it earlier and that’s where I was like 🤷🏽♀️
I feel like if Greenpeace DID try and say what kind of changes they propose, it’d be wading in to the middle of a bunch of engineering and cryptographer arguments.
The unstated part, is ethereum is the socially responsible cryptocurrency and bitcoin is the bad one.
Personally, I am worried about climate change, and while bitcoin isn’t the biggest contributor, there are lower impact solutions for consensus. But we should also encourage the purchase and use of e-bikes and raise fewer cows. And fly less, but I flew half way around the world for Nostrica because I felt it was important.
To be fair, I don’t even think people need to fly less.
There are more aggressive things to the climate change than our personal actions.
The way and means of production with so much waste before it even come to us to be consumed is the main reason of our green problems.
E-Bikes are actually a lot worse for the environment than bikes. Had to calculate this when I started a bike rental a few years ago. Especially when the bikes stand still most of the time it’s actually a huge waste of resources. Classic bikes without motor and battery are >10x better for the environment. So if you’re an environmentalist you don’t promote e-bikes but bikes. My proof of e bicycle work 😊👇 
I think you should look at e-bikes vs cars and public transportation. Adopting ebikes causes people to switch to using that more than the cars/public transport. Sure if you compare bikes vs ebikes, nothing beats bikes.
Because these e-bikes are rented out for long distances almost every day, it made sense in comparison with cars FI. But the cycling was mostly for leasure, so again an additional waste of resources in comparison with renting a traditional bike. Fact, most people want comfort and are too lazy to be on a normal bike. Comfort creates waste and reduces personal physical proof of work.
Your point that you flew to the conference because you find it important is the exact ethical question everyone should ask themselves. Do i waste more resources and pollute our spaceship earth for future generations or not? Is it worth it?
Most people have no clue of the actual impact. So the only way to go about this is education and less free money on credit. When the cheap financing of all the junk e-bikes on payment plans for people stop, less will be bought. At least we would see less waste in the Netherlands because government incentives gave almost everyone an e-bike with a payment plan that was extremely cheap. Now everyone is on an e-bike while before the people were on traditional bikes. A huge nett negative for the environment… FYI. Picture below of the fire safe concrete battery charging vault I designed and built back then. Fully charged with solar. 
wow! How much?
You should do your part and turn off your relay. You are clearly polluting by running node and posting.
if you start the rest will follow.
These artists are from Burnjng Man right?
Exactly. It’s not a campaign against bitcoin but a campaign against the alleged environmental effects of bitcoin. We win when we show that we can address/appease their concerns not ignore them.
Because “climate” is an extremely hot topic in Europe we’re focusing on “carbon negative” mining solutions. Fact is, that it’s the only way to mine profitably in Europe. You need to
-use the heat
-have large scale consumption
-input excess electricity from renewables.
Ticking all three boxes is even better.
The reason large corporations like Facebook and Google are in the Netherlands is due to extremely cheap electricity for large consumers. No tax for them while there’s a high tax for the general population (>50% over energy). When the natural gas prices soared, the population paid the bill to compensate the long term contracts for the large corporate consumers.
Because the population saw prices of far over €1,- per kWh almost everyone started to install solar. Yesterday and today this already resulted in negative prices on grid electricity. Our transformers at the solar setups shut down, due to overload on the grid. If you can’t use all electricity you produce, you physically can’t deliver it on the grid anymore. The first projects where we mine away the overcapacity at small farms are starting this summer. There is not much choice, it’s either mine it or find another way to consume it directly. And these farmers don’t have another way to consume it directly. Netherlands will become a distributed bitcoin mining heaven with all this insanely rapid build out overcapacity of renewables in a contracting economy. If we would use Google, Facebook and other corporations less the national consumption of electricity would actually drop significantly. The question now is, what is more important? Financial sovereignty or a viral cat? Free market decides. The cats will keep on winning until the true price of the viral cat starts to be paid. I believe that time might be more near than we think.
Sounds like you’re doing carbon neutral bitcoin mining then. So then the greenpeace campaign isn’t targeting your mining or the way you’re doing it.
I like the idea of mining kicking in when the grid or any part of it has more electricity generated than it needs to consume or is able to store. Better to use miners as load shedding than simply finding a way to dump it.
When we use the heat of renewables and use less natural gas where we used to heat with previously, it’s actually “carbon negative”. I’m not the bean country type of guy but it at least got mainstream attention at CNN and AFP. This is what we build out throughout last year: examples that could be shared publicly: greenhouse, warehouse. But there were also a restaurant, offices, lumber workshop etc etc.
Yes, they call it “Demand Response” (not a punk band)
