Crypto-cancer fade out end of civilization for Fermi paradox?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jarek 31
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fermi Paradox
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the implications of cryptocurrencies on resource consumption and their potential role in the Fermi paradox, particularly focusing on whether the positive feedback mechanisms associated with cryptocurrencies could lead to the collapse of civilization. Participants examine the theoretical limits of energy consumption by cryptocurrencies and the societal dynamics surrounding their growth.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that cryptocurrencies create a positive feedback loop that incentivizes resource waste, potentially leading to civilization's collapse.
  • Others question the sustainability of such a model, citing historical examples like cocaine production that have not dominated global resources despite high profitability.
  • A participant argues that the extensive resource requirements of cryptocurrencies could lead to their rapid collapse if bans or market changes occur.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential for cryptocurrencies to consume an unsustainable percentage of world energy, with some suggesting that a saturation point may exist below 100%.
  • Some participants highlight that not all cryptocurrencies require the same energy, suggesting that alternatives may emerge that are more efficient.
  • There is speculation about the long-term evolution of cryptocurrencies and their societal impact, with questions about the balance between positive feedback mechanisms and negative feedback that could prevent self-destruction.
  • One participant emphasizes the need for a critical examination of the assumptions underlying the sustainability of cryptocurrencies as a business model.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on the sustainability of cryptocurrencies or their potential to lead to civilization's end. Some believe that positive feedback mechanisms will dominate, while others argue that limitations will emerge to prevent total resource consumption.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge various assumptions about resource availability, societal behavior, and the dynamics of cryptocurrency markets, but these remain unresolved within the discussion.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring the intersections of technology, economics, and societal behavior, particularly in the context of sustainability and the implications of emerging financial systems.

Can positive feedback mechanisms like cryptocurrencies be balanced on a reasonable level?

  • Yes

    Votes: 2 66.7%

  • No

    Votes: 1 33.3%
  • Total voters
    3
  • #61
Rive said:
There are circumstances when there supposed to be no/less privacy (for example in case of supposed criminal activity) in private matters. How does bitcoin provides this kind of functions?
It doesn't. Bitcoin has no intrinsic privacy features as far as I am aware. Any privacy is solely due to the difficulty of linking a specific wallet to a specific person. If you know that wallet 204B (simplified wallet address) is my personal wallet, you can see the details of every transaction to and from that wallet and track what I'm doing with it. Even 'mixers', which take in bitcoin from multiple wallets and distributes them to other wallets to hide 'hot' BTC, only works because you don't know who owns those wallets. If you don't know who owns wallet 204B, you can still see the details of every transaction, you just don't know who's doing it.

Office_Shredder said:
There's a reason all the ransomware demands ask for the money in Bitcoin and not dollars.
Indeed. It's like telling someone to go to the corner and drop $100 into a black lunchbox if they want their data back. Except with BTC you don't have to have someone physically pick up the cash, physically move the cash around, or physically store it, which greatly simplifies the whole process. No middlemen to rat you out, no big wads of cash for the feds to find, etc.
Jarek 31 said:
But in the past they just couldn't directly consume these resources ... crypto has removed such upper limits, one can waste practically all available resources on mining.
No, you can't. I don't know why you think you can. The amount of energy consumed by crypto mining will only rise until it becomes unprofitable for it to rise further. This is mostly linked to the price. Higher prices let the amount of energy consumed while mining increase, since a higher price means I can sell my mined crypto for more and afford my higher energy bill.

Also, if you look at the long term bitcoin price chart, you'll notice that it's actually increasing logarithmically, not exponentially. It's just the short timescale price jumps that are exponential.
https://www.lookintobitcoin.com/charts/bitcoin-logarithmic-growth-curve/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fluidistic
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Drakkith said:
Bitcoin has no intrinsic privacy features as far as I am aware.
Both having privacy and having it limited are results of long evolution of the concerning legal environment: both side has very serious reasons to exist.

Without supporting both (!) side of the legal framework there is just no way it can survive for long: long enough to become any 'real' currency.
 
  • #63
Rive said:
Both having privacy and having it limited are results of long evolution of the concerning legal environment: both side has very serious reasons to exist.

Without supporting both (!) side of the legal framework there is just no way it can survive for long: long enough to become any 'real' currency.
Why? Your normal transactions at the store are public, regardless of whether they are cash, credit, or debit. Everyone around you sees what you're buying, and the companies handling your credit/debit transactions know where you're shopping and how much you're spending. People talk about google selling your info, but I imagine there is a long history of this in the credit card industry.

I don't see that privacy is necessary for bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies to survive. In fact, it might help some of them avoid legal issues since it makes it much more difficult to use for illegal activities than a privacy-featured crypto.
 
  • #64
Drakkith said:
Why? Your normal transactions at the store are public, regardless of whether they are cash, credit, or debit. Everyone around you sees what you're buying, and the companies handling your credit/debit transactions know where you're shopping and how much you're spending. People talk about google selling your info, but I imagine there is a long history of this in the credit card industry.

I don't see that privacy is necessary for bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies to survive. In fact, it might help some of them avoid legal issues since it makes it much more difficult to use for illegal activities than a privacy-featured crypto.
I agree with everything you've wrote so far in this thread Drakkith. However, some people like Richard Stallman only use cash in order to have some privacy. It doesn't really matter if a stranger sees what you buy with cash, as long as it's not recorded anywhere. The thing is, supermarkets are filled with cameras and it's probably not too hard to have a good estimate of who buys what, even if they pay by cash. If privacy is a human right, then I think that at least some "private" cryptocurrency must exist. But as you pointed out, Bitcoin is extremely far from being one, and it isn't a necessity at all for its surviving.
 
  • #65
worth noting the idea that conventional or ‘fiat’ currency gets value arbitrarily solely based on social convention is a canard - currency gets its value from the creditworthiness of the issuer (which is why dollars are worth more than bolivars). US citizens have to pay taxes in dollars and dollars represent a claim on the credit of the US government. Maybe in the future the US government will be unable to service its debts and the dollar will then be a poor store of value, but for now its what we buy groceries with.
 
  • #66
BWV said:
worth noting the idea that conventional or ‘fiat’ currency gets value arbitrarily solely based on social convention is a canard - currency gets its value from the creditworthiness of the issuer (which is why dollars are worth more than bolivars). US citizens have to pay taxes in dollars and dollars represent a claim on the credit of the US government. Maybe in the future the US government will be unable to service its debts and the dollar will then be a poor store of value, but for now its what we buy groceries with.
I thought the US was already in debt? I don't think dollars are a good store of value, due to inflation, but you do make a solid argument for US dollars being a good currency (better than bitcoin is, for sure.) Of course there are probably many crypto currencies better than bitcoin as well.
 
  • #67
BWV said:
(which is why dollars are worth more than bolivars).

Tell me more about how the us dollar is worth 100x more than the Japanese yen because the us is that much better of a credit risk.

There's obviously a lot more going on than just credit worthiness, and measuring the literal exchange rate is missing most of the point.
 
  • #68
Office_Shredder said:
Tell me more about how the us dollar is worth 100x more than the Japanese yen because the us is that much better of a credit risk.

There's obviously a lot more going on than just credit worthiness, and measuring the literal exchange rate is missing most of the point.
Why are you confusing exchange rates with value? The yen was pegged at 0.5 to usd until the Depression and WW2, when understandably it depreciated quite a bit
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #69
Office_Shredder said:
Tell me more about how the us dollar is worth 100x more than the Japanese yen
Huh? You are talking about apples and oranges --- exchange rate vs value

EDIT: oops ... I see @BWV beat me to it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #70
BWV said:
Why are you confusing exchange rates with value? The yen was pegged at 0.5 to usd until the Depression and WW2, when understandably it depreciated quite a bit

Dollars are worth more than bolivars sounds like a statement about exchange rates to me? What metric are you using to measure this?
 
  • #71
Office_Shredder said:
Dollars are worth more than bolivars sounds like a statement about exchange rates to me? What metric are you using to measure this?
This, for example:
https://www.investopedia.com/updates/purchasing-power-parity-ppp/

It attempts to account for differences in currency value (or a country's economic situation) that remain even after accounting for exchange rate.
 
  • #72
Office_Shredder said:
Dollars are worth more than bolivars sounds like a statement about exchange rates to me? What metric are you using to measure this

the trajectory of exchange rates, not the meaningless unit conversion, reflects the relative creditworthiness of the two countries
1625574437708.png
 
  • #73
Thread locked, temporarily at least.

Edit: I've deleted a number of crackpot posts and responses. Still trying to decide what to do with the thread...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Civilization of millions of rings.
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Solaculture: A novel biological approach for low cost energy?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Could New Materials Propel China's Industry to Bill Gates-Level Success?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
10K