China’s Inner Mongolia Declares War on Crypto Mining

[tikker]

2 hours ago, Lord Bloobus said:

I'm also really tired of seeing people posting cards mining when there are dozens of threads daily about people still unable to get one for their intended purpose, just so people can squeeze a few more dollars out of nothing.

This "intended purpose" stuff is just an argument out of spite in my eyes. All the datacenters, scientists and what not crunching numbers on their GPUs should wrap up shop as well then, because 99.9% of the time they sure aren't gaming on it. Gamers aren't some master race (contrary to what some may think) deserving exclusive access to GPUs. Their purpose is number crunching. If it were scientists hoarding all the GPUs you'd be mad at scientists. If it were farmers you'd be mad at farmers.

2 hours ago, Lord Bloobus said:

Arguing about anything but the negatives is a useless argument (especially here) since despite them, people are making money till it makes a large enough power bubble that needs to get squashed (look at the title of this article). If you have hardware already and mine with it, that's fine; if you're purchasing new equipment to mine more, I wish you the best but I also hope crypto still dies quickly as I'm sure many others would like it to. I'm also really tired of seeing people posting cards mining when there are dozens of threads daily about people still unable to get one for their intended purpose, just so people can squeeze a few more dollars out of nothing.

Why are we not allowed to argue positives or why others do like it? Then you're just joining the "I don't like it so it's bad" camp. Look at solar cells. In the beginning they were horribly inefficient and expensive. Look at them now. You can't just focus on the negatives. Unless what you meant is that we should also argue for positives, in which case I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

 

It's also not squeezing dollars out of nothing. The coins may appear out of thin air, but you'll still have to spend fiat to get them, so no actual money is printed out of thin air. There is a service that is provided that people apparently like and causes them to attribute value to it. Since our world still revolves around fiat, anything that starts to gain value will inevitable become worth something in fiat.

 

While miners certainly have an impact on supply, there still is also a lot more going on currently that's causing the supply shortages. Even completely unrelated factories, such as car manufacturers, are shutting down because they can't get the silicon. It's not just miners screwing things up.

1 hour ago, Lord Bloobus said:

So to ASICs, I have nothing more to add than the original points except they're even worse offenders in the electronic waste area, but will admit they can be more energy efficient. And all my negatives have already happened, they're continuing to happen, and every day cryptomining continues, the effect worsens.

Nobody's argueing ASICs are efficient and nobody is argueing that mining isn't bad and needs to stay. I agree with that.

 

57 minutes ago, wkdpaul said:

People need to start getting comfortable with crypto currencies, it's here to stay, I just hope more currencies switch to PoS instead of PoW, that would be a good start.

Indeed. Perhaps in 100 years it has evolved into something great we look back and think "how did we ever get by without this". Imaginge no internet! If you think about it I find it kind of ironic. It's argueing one thing is wasteful because it's something that was "intended" to be used for something that is equally wasteful from an energy perspective.

 

 

In general, this makes me think about what people would have thought about the internet at first. I found David Bowie's view on it very interesting (timestamped, listen from 9:10 and on):

His view on the internet was very profound I think:

Quote

The interplay between user and provider will be so in sympatico it’s going to crush our ideas of what mediums are all about.

The interviewer mentions the opposing views of "it is just a tool isn't it?" or "it is simply a different delivery system". Especially the latter is rather applicable here I think. Most people didn't seem to see the benefit of the internet, but Bowie (and surely others) recognized there was a huge potential for something to grow and come forth of it. The creators of the internet surely had not inteded to provide us with a platform to argue over silly things like the worth of virtual coin (Bowie might have though :P).

 

We're currently seeing crypto as "just a tool" and "simply a different payment system", but there could be a lot of potential under the hood that we can't see yet because our current systems and ways of going about things are not made for it.

 

 

[mwagen]

1 hour ago, Moonzy said:

I'm actually interested to know how much electricity does gamer use now, given that steam recently have record high simultaneous users for few months in a row now not for using it against gamers, but pure curiosity tbh

 

Pointing fingers at each other for electricity use is like a pot calling a kettle black, it's stupid as both sides consume electricity to do whatever they wish to do for their own endeavor.

Well, seeing as how it isn't gamers pointing fingers but the main stream news cycle running stories on it, I'd say it's a valid if not indefensible criticism of the mining endeavor. Trying to spread the guilt around to gamers is just another weak deflection. Yeah, we use gpus, too, but the difference is we only have one, not 12 running 24/7. We're already exhausted by the wrecked gpu market so why can't you just take that victory and shaddup already.

[Moonzy]

1 hour ago, mwagen said:

Well, seeing as how it isn't gamers pointing fingers but the main stream news cycle running stories on it, I'd say it's a valid if not indefensible criticism of the mining endeavor. Trying to spread the guilt around to gamers is just another weak deflection. Yeah, we use gpus, too, but the difference is we only have one, not 12 running 24/7. We're already exhausted by the wrecked gpu market so why can't you just take that victory and shaddup already.

I'm not saying mining isn't consuming electricity at an unhealthy scale, not at all

 

The media probably only covers what gets clicks, and hating on miner would garner much clicks, while posting anything negative about the gaming industry = memes and hates

 

I have no right to judge how other people would use their electricity, so I won't

Just morbidly curious because it's always brought up as defense by people against mining because they can't get their GPU for gaming

 

Trust me when I say I'm more exhausted than you are at the shortage

Because buying GPU is just as hard for me, and I have to do it multiple times, instead of just one time

But I'm willing to keep doing it at this point, just to cause chaos because salty people like you ruined my mood tbh

[mwagen]

1 hour ago, Moonzy said:

I'm not saying mining isn't consuming electricity at an unhealthy scale, not at all

 

The media probably only covers what gets clicks, and hating on miner would garner much clicks, while posting anything negative and gaming industry = memes and hates

 

I have no right to judge how other people would use their electricity, so I won't

Just morbidly curious because it's always brought up as defense by people against mining because they can't get their GPU for gaming

 

Trust me when I say I'm more exhausted than you are at the shortage

Because buying GPU is just as hard for me, and I have to do it multiple times, instead of just one time

But I'm willing to do it

Interesting response...

 

So, you agree that mining consumes an unhealthy amount of electricity but then feel it's "hate" for an article to report the facts of mining's electricity use? 

 

Also interesting when you say you won't judge how people use "their" electricity. Seems to reveal a naive, self-centered first world view, that electricity is a thing that anybody can simply buy and claim ownership of instead of being a limited resource we all essentially share. 

 

Pretty sure you're being sarcastic in the last part, but if you're not... Turning a profit may require multiple gpus but mining itself is no more essential than gaming and you reek of the same entitlement to gpus that gamers are accused of. Moreover you have zero qualms over contributing to the gross energy consumption and gpu shortage. You're either trolling or completely unaware of the bubble you live in.

[Moonzy]

Just now, mwagen said:

Also interesting when you say you won't judge how people use "their" electricity. Seems to reveal a naive first world view, that electricity is a thing that anybody can simply buy and claim ownership of instead of being a limited resource we all essentially share.

So who is to decide what's the "right way" to use electricity?

 

1 minute ago, mwagen said:

So, you agree that mining consumes an unhealthy amount of electricity but then feel it's "hate" for an article to report the facts of mining's electricity use? 

"Hating" would be the wrong term perhaps, but reporting on the negative aspects does generate clicks because people love to blame on someone when something goes wrong

 

4 minutes ago, mwagen said:

Turning a profit may require multiple gpus

Nah, today's rate is so dummy juicy that if you already own a moderately modern gaming PC, you'd be profiting from mining

 

It's a useful tool to subsidize your investment into a PC, so use it wisely.

I am happy to do the numbers for you if you can give me an example system.

 

6 minutes ago, mwagen said:

you reek of the same entitlement to gpus that gamers are accused of.

Nah, I don't whine or cry when there's no GPU, I just be happy with what I have

And just buy whatever comes my way if I see any

 

6 minutes ago, mwagen said:

Moreover you have zero qualms over contributing to the gross energy consumption and gpu shortage

I don't, because it's my hobby to tweak and fiddle with hardwares as I've said before

I didn't care if people SLI or could afford 980Ti while I could only buy a single 970 to game on before mining came along, so I don't get why people are getting angry when people are willingly pay higher prices for things they think it's worth it.

 

I would argue using electricity to generate funds for my hobby is worth it to me.

 

The GPU shortage sucks, but I buy my GPU from the shelf like anyone else, so it's no foul play in my book.

In fact, the GPU I bought is still in stock two days later, 3080 at $2200, feel free to buy it if you think it's worth it, I can justify the cost of the GPU that's why I bought it at such a price.

I'm not gonna not buy a GPU because gamer joe can't afford it, it sounds silly to even think about it.

[Blademaster91]

2 hours ago, tikker said:

This "intended purpose" stuff is just an argument out of spite in my eyes. All the datacenters, scientists and what not crunching numbers on their GPUs should wrap up shop as well then, because 99.9% of the time they sure aren't gaming on it. Gamers aren't some master race (contrary to what some may think) deserving exclusive access to GPUs. Their purpose is number crunching. If it were scientists hoarding all the GPUs you'd be mad at scientists. If it were farmers you'd be mad at farmers.

So with that logic then datacanters and scientists can't get GPU's either. And scientists are actually doing something with GPU's, not hoarding GPU's for the purposes of generating fake coins.

2 hours ago, tikker said:

Why are we not allowed to argue positives or why others do like it? Then you're just joining the "I don't like it so it's bad" camp. Look at solar cells. In the beginning they were horribly inefficient and expensive. Look at them now. You can't just focus on the negatives. Unless what you meant is that we should also argue for positives, in which case I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

I don't see how ETH for example compares to solar cells, its literally trying to avoid using ASICs which would be incredibly more efficient than miners hoarding consumer GPUs.

2 hours ago, tikker said:

It's also not squeezing dollars out of nothing. The coins may appear out of thin air, but you'll still have to spend fiat to get them, so no actual money is printed out of thin air. There is a service that is provided that people apparently like and causes them to attribute value to it. Since our world still revolves around fiat, anything that starts to gain value will inevitable become worth something in fiat

It's squeezing dollars out of nothing based out of another coin that is worth nothing until its cashed in for fiat currency.

2 hours ago, tikker said:

While miners certainly have an impact on supply, there still is also a lot more going on currently that's causing the supply shortages. Even completely unrelated factories, such as car manufacturers, are shutting down because they can't get the silicon. It's not just miners screwing things up.

Car manufacturers get their stuff from TSMC, so AMD has an excuse for the shortages, but Nvidia not so much, the shortages of RTX 30 series cards hasn't gotten any better since September 2020, so I think miners and scalpers have been screwing up that part of the market.

20 minutes ago, mwagen said:

Interesting response...

 

So, you agree that mining consumes an unhealthy amount of electricity but then feel it's "hate" for an article to report the facts of mining's electricity use? 

 

Also interesting when you say you won't judge how people use "their" electricity. Seems to reveal a naive first world view, that electricity is a thing that anybody can simply buy and claim ownership of instead of being a limited resource we all essentially share. 

 

Pretty sure you're being sarcastic in the last part, but if you're not... Turning a profit may require multiple gpus but mining itself is no more essential than gaming and you reek of the same entitlement to gpus that gamers are accused of. Moreover you have zero qualms over contributing to the gross energy consumption and gpu shortage. You're either trolling or completely unaware of the bubble you live in.

This topic had nothing to do with gaming until miners go "but gaming bad" as they do with most of these crypto related topics, wanting to spin the topic back around to other use besides mining then whining when someone says GPUs should be sold for the intended market is so ironic to me. IMO when shortages get to the point that news is constantly reporting on it, and miners are causing power issues then its a problem.

Edit- I noticed there was already the claims of miners using 3X more power than gamers do, not sure why miners would feel entited they need to use that much more power on nothing then blame gamers on it.

[tikker]

6 minutes ago, mwagen said:

Also interesting when you say you won't judge how people use "their" electricity. Seems to reveal a naive first world view, that electricity is a thing that anybody can simply buy and claim ownership of instead of being a limited resource we all essentially share. 

  Well you sign a contract with a power company and they charge you a certain rate per kWh, so yes, you "simply" buy electricity. You don't pay, your connection will be turned off.

16 minutes ago, mwagen said:

Pretty sure you're being sarcastic in the last part, but if you're not... Turning a profit may require multiple gpus but mining itself is no more essential than gaming and you reek of the same entitlement to gpus that gamers are accused of. Moreover you have zero qualms over contributing to the gross energy consumption and gpu shortage. You're either trolling or completely unaware of the bubble you live in.

I think they even said that mining and gaming are both not essential. How does that imply entitlement? The argument is both are hobbies, neither are a necessity so neither has more right to a GPU than the other. Also who's to say they're not running off of renewables.

4 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

So with that logic then datacanters and scientists can't get GPU's either. And scientists are actually doing something with GPU's, not hoarding GPU's for the purposes of generating fake coins.

Yep scientists have trouble getting GPUs as well because, guess what, there's a global shortage. See there is the problem with "actually doing something". Is gaming "doing something"? Just as much a waste as mining from an energy usage perspective. Is using GPUs to teach computers to recognize objects and handwriting "doing something"? One probably says yes, because we see a more direct influence in making our lives easier, which we never seem to have a problem with, but do we really need to waste resources and power on AI so we can have our self driving cars? What are the scientists doing that make them "actually do something"? I use GPUs to image the sky as they benefit me a lot in speeding the imaging process. Is that "doing something"? It's not like it's useful knowledge for day to day life to know what comprises a galaxy a billion light years away.

 

It's the same as the discussion where people try to argue we should spend the millions in astronomy on cancer research, or any other combination of "obviously useless" and "obviously useful" research field instead because that is "actually doing something". One side inherently doesn't see any value in what the other side is doing and therefore cannot justify it.

21 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

I don't see how ETH for example compares to solar cells, its literally trying to avoid using ASICs which would be incredibly more efficient than miners hoarding consumer GPUs.

What I was trying to say is that at the early stages solar cells were inefficient and expensive to make. If I were to guess durability in the early days probably wasn't the best either. Did they just throw their hands and say "well this tech sucks, let's stick to burning coal"? No. Research continued, materials changed, implementations changed, which eventually led to more efficient and more affordable versions. Mining is just one implementation of block chain and current cryptos. Plenty of other projects have no mining involved. It's an evolving process. No innovation without experimentation.

 

ETH is indeed literally designed to not be ASIC mineable. Why? Because the shit show that Bitcoin now is is a perfect example of what happens if it is. I'm sure you've read e.g. some miners even buying up laptops to mine, so I think you can put 2 and 2 together and figure out that people will hoard whatever can make them money. If only cellphones could mine it we'd have a global cellphone shortage. If potatoes were to somehow gain value over time, we'd have a potato shortage.

 

Something that many seem to either ignore or are oblivious to: mining in and of itself isn't the point. This isn't just "hey you guessed a number, here's $5" and you go on to the next. You are providing and supporting the network on which the services run. The coins you get from mining are a reward for doing that. This is again just one implementation. Many projects realise it isn't efficient or sustainable and don't use mining and not every project is trying to be a currency to buy bread with.

 

40 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

It's squeezing dollars out of nothing based out of another coin that is worth nothing until its cashed in for fiat currency.

I mean, you can't use a chunk of gold to buy bread in most places either so in that regard it's just as useless until exchanged for fiat. I feel the problem here is simply that people are just unwilling to accept that cryptocoins have value now, because they don't see a point in it. They don't see a point, because it's something completely different from what we have been used to for basically as long as we have dealt in currencies. Also not every coin out there aims to be the next dollar. If you want to do stuff on the Ethereum network, then ETH has value. You don't, so ETH has no value to you. What's the problem in that.

 

58 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Car manufacturers get their stuff from TSMC, so AMD has an excuse for the shortages, but Nvidia not so much, the shortages of RTX 30 series cards hasn't gotten any better since September 2020,

Moot point. You know supply issues reach further than just TSMC. Samsung's yield is supposedly also low, so Nvidia it's not like Nvidia has no excuse. Also how entitled are we getting that in these times nota bene a GPU company, i.e. nothing essential, needs an excuse for lower supply than hoped?

1 hour ago, Blademaster91 said:

so I think miners and scalpers have been screwing up that part of the market.

I agree. They definitely have, but I do think current worldly circumstances make it a lot more noticeable.

 

1 hour ago, Blademaster91 said:

This topic had nothing to do with gaming until miners go "but gaming bad" as they do with most of these crypto related topics, wanting to spin the topic back around to other use besides mining then whining when someone says GPUs should be sold for the intended market is so ironic to me.

Because the crypto haters know only one argument: bitcoin mining uses so much energy

Taking an interest in how much energy gaming uses or how much would be used if all GPUs had gone to gamers, compared to mining is a perfectly logical step. In the context of energy, both are inherently useless and waste energy.

[Kisai]

12 hours ago, tikker said:

  Agree with most of your points here. ASICs you can almost say are already "garbage" when they hit the market, as the producer probably already mined their worth. The energy argument is a bit more tricky, because so many things we do or produce just use energy with nothing recoverable.

ASIC's end up being waste from three angles, the waste of the materials, the waste of the energy to mine the materials, and the waste of the ASIC's when they're no longer profitable. Honestly, it's one of those cases where the people who actually made money are the ones who sold the miners.

 

12 hours ago, tikker said:

Landfill argument is also sound, though they probably end up there anyway. Technology just doesn't age that well, you are right that people tend to be apprehensive about stuff used for mining, as you of course can't be 100% sure it was used properly and treated with care whereas otherwise it'd may have gotten a 2nd or 3rd life. The same applies to normal use as well though. There are miners that take good care of their cards and gamers that push them way to far frying them up.

 

If you've ever seen how businesses dispose of computer hardware, it's always stuff that has little or no value, and it's treated like garbage. Some third party comes in, throws things into dumpster, and hauls it away. No care is taken. That's why I'm saying the GPU's in ex-mining equipment are very likely run into the ground and then thrown away when something can replace them.

 

12 hours ago, tikker said:

I can find myself in this actually. One could easily figure out what a sort of average home electricity usage is or have different tarifs for various usage levels. We have part of that in place already here. Daytime power costs more than nighttime (albeit a tiny amount).

The roadblock is really how energy is, or isn't regulated.

 

In a deregulated market (see Texas, Enron) the generation sources and transmissions sources can pretty much toast miners if they wanted. However dirty-energy producers don't care about that, if they have to shut down, they lose money, so they will keep burning coal and natural gas regardless of the input costs until there are no customers buying. 

 

If energy is regulated, then the energy producers can not make an unapproved change in costs to consumers. So green energy usually benefits from a regulated market because their energy costs are more expensive, while dirty energy ends up subsidizing green energy as they're forced to sell it at the same rate. This also means that IPP (independent power producers) can rip off the regulated market, driving up costs for everyone.

 

So back to mining, If miners are buying energy from green IPP's, or their own green energy generation, then there is no net environmental cost, they're just producing cryptocoins and not hurting everyone in the process, other than maybe causing shortages in mining equipment and generation/transmission hardware. I doubt there are any cryptominers doing this because it's just cheaper to buy from a regulated state utility than deal with any of this.

 

 

[Brooksie359]

14 hours ago, MageTank said:

I'd argue otherwise. People can be entertained by the challenge of having to come up with proper cooling solutions for their mining setups, the challenge of undervolting each card and gathering the data on binning each cards ability to undervolt, the aforementioned thrill of the hunt for new hardware or even the more trivial part of simply watching your crypto accumulation increase. Like I said, you cannot dictate what is considered entertainment for others simply because you yourself do not find it entertaining. Arguing subjective opinions is a fruitless endeavor.

 

You may disagree with the current landscape of cryptocurrency, but others may view it differently. If they prefer to trade cryptos over traditional stocks, that is entirely their decision to do so. 

 

I'll extend my offer for a proper debate on the subject, let's avoid the dismissive approach and actually discuss some real comparisons.

Well I am entertained by dumping oil in the river. That doesn't mean it's ok for me to do so. If they want to tweak their hardware to run efficiently why not have them actually do something useful with it like folding at home or any other process that isn't a complete waste of resources. And cryptocurrency trading is objectively worse than traditional stock trading because its completely unregulated. If they find trading cryptocurrency entertaining then they can simply do it with stocks because cryptocurrency needs to go. 

[Brooksie359]

13 hours ago, Moonzy said:

crypto currency is a good way to subsidize my hobby of hardware owning + tweaking

 

 

i do enjoy sitting beside my mining rig, tweaking numbers, watching numbers change, and recording everything down

nothing else would come close to allowing me to do this while getting paid to do so, other than some jobs that require me to review it or something, which i do not intend to do

 

never in my life will I pay $2200 for a 3080, but mining allows me to do so as i can re-coup the cost of it using my other GPU in 3 weeks, or by itself in few months.

 

so yes, it may be useless and pointless to you, but it allows me to do things i like and so i find it useful.

That doesn't justify the existence of cryptocurrency. It is legitimately a problem and doesn't provide anything useful for how much energy its consuming. People can make money by doing all sorts of things that are horrible for the environment but that doesn't mean it's ok and even when they do so most of them at least produce something of value while cryptocurrency doesn't. Its entire worth is based on other people's thoughts and feelings. Its so easily manipulated that it is basically the stock market without any regulations. It could be worth nothing tomorrow and nothing could be done about it. 

[Brooksie359]

13 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

You could argue the same thing about gaming, lol. Gaming is even worse since you are wasting that energy for literally nothing and are getting nothing in return . At least cryptocurrency lets you make money. 

I can't believe I have to explain this for the 100th time. Gaming is for entertainment. Cryptocurrency on the other hand doesn't produce a good or service. Sure you can make money off of it because enough dumb people buy it but that doesn't make it a good or service of value. 

[owwnoooo]

People around here are talking as if crypto currency is useless as it is volatile but no one is talking about how worse real currency is . Imagine the blockchain is like a  bank they audit transactions . In the blockchain there is very less chance of fraud and mismanagement and fake currency going into rotation and it is safer to keep your money in . If you say bitcoin is unstable , what about Zimbabwe dollar , what about the Venezuelan bolivar , and i can go on. Cryptocurrency sounds bad as most of the people in this thread are from america,canada or western europe where governments are stable and they can be trusted, but it is not the case around the world. There are a lot of problems with exploitation of banking system in many countries and with mining and crypto those issues can be solved , but bitcoin or etherum is not the perfect solution , there are better cryptos like monero or stablecoins but the hate around cryptos is mainly due to the fact that people profit from mining but think of it like this , crypto mining is automating a bank's job would you say a banker consumes too much food for auditing your US dollar bank account and hence bad for environment and so banks should be banned? doesn't make sense. A cryptocurrency is just a currency where no individual in power can take control of peoples' lives and countries' economy. Crypto is a right way for humanity. Go to venezuela and tell people to use bolivar and tell them crypto is bad. you will learn the value of crypto. comparing gaming to mining is apples to oranges , you guys are fine with scientists and governments building supercomputers and other stuff but not miners as you think they are filthy people who caused the GPU price to go up. Think of mining the same way as banking. It is safe to say that crypto and mining is future for governments and governments around the world are trying to stop it (IRS has a $650,000 bounty for who can crack monero) so instead of promoting a safe and stable currency why are we guys not spreading it into market till such an extent that we use crypto to buy veggies, only then will crypto turn from something like stocks-HOLD to the moon BS to real currency just like the USD ,GBP ,EUR and others

[leadeater]

8 hours ago, tikker said:

It's the same as the discussion where people try to argue we should spend the millions in astronomy on cancer research, or any other combination of "obviously useless" and "obviously useful" research field instead because that is "actually doing something". One side inherently doesn't see any value in what the other side is doing and therefore cannot justify it.

Yep often very much this, also there isn't much consideration taken to the issue that if the resources from one thing was taken away and given to the other that it would say, actually speed up the time for a cure for cancer to be found. GPU supply is a bit more of direct issue but with things like this example there isn't always a true direct relationship between resources allocated and resulting output.

 

So in furtherance to that without the data on total units produced, production rate, total units sold, rate of sales, demographics of sales we actually do not know the impact of ceasing all mining related sales. Supply would obviously improve for none mining buyers but by how much.

 

8 hours ago, tikker said:

Yep scientists have trouble getting GPUs as well because, guess what, there's a global shortage

To be honest if you are an academic institution and are proposing a large purchase of GPUs getting supply won't really be a problem. Say for example if I went to our HPE partner and said we are looking to buy 1000 GPUs that would definitely priority from Nvidia. Product supply simply is not fairly allocated, it's just how it is and it's not actually all that wrong either. So the academic looking to buy 1 or 2 or maybe even 10 might have quite a big problem getting them. just like everyone else, but those "important" customers generally don't have as hard a time even during supply shortages.

[Moonzy]

5 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

and doesn't provide anything useful

Me: -explained that it provides something useful to me-

Brooksie: no

 

I don't know what else to say, you're just dismissive at this point

 

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Say for example if I went to our HPE partner and said we are looking to buy 1000 GPUs that would definitely priority from Nvidia.

Ladies and gentlemen, we got him

 

Get the weatherman, he's buying up all the GPU

[leadeater]

12 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

Ladies and gentlemen, we got him

If 1000 GPUs is a significant portion of monthly supply then we all have much bigger problems than we realize lol.

[RTX 3090]

imo they should still have the freedom to do whatever they want, but everyone should have a reasonable power limit like 20-30kwh per day, and they can't have anything beyond that. That is so that people sitting at home can still do whatever they want with their home PC, but others don't hog all the GPU's to them self and single handedly strain the countries power sources. 

[RTX 3090]

5 hours ago, owwnoooo said:

People around here are talking as if crypto currency is useless as it is volatile but no one is talking about how worse real currency is . Imagine the blockchain is like a  bank they audit transactions . In the blockchain there is very less chance of fraud and mismanagement and fake currency going into rotation and it is safer to keep your money in . If you say bitcoin is unstable , what about Zimbabwe dollar , what about the Venezuelan bolivar , and i can go on. Cryptocurrency sounds bad as most of the people in this thread are from america,canada or western europe where governments are stable and they can be trusted, but it is not the case around the world. There are a lot of problems with exploitation of banking system in many countries and with mining and crypto those issues can be solved , but bitcoin or etherum is not the perfect solution , there are better cryptos like monero or stablecoins but the hate around cryptos is mainly due to the fact that people profit from mining but think of it like this , crypto mining is automating a bank's job would you say a banker consumes too much food for auditing your US dollar bank account and hence bad for environment and so banks should be banned? doesn't make sense. A cryptocurrency is just a currency where no individual in power can take control of peoples' lives and countries' economy. Crypto is a right way for humanity. Go to venezuela and tell people to use bolivar and tell them crypto is bad. you will learn the value of crypto. comparing gaming to mining is apples to oranges , you guys are fine with scientists and governments building supercomputers and other stuff but not miners as you think they are filthy people who caused the GPU price to go up. Think of mining the same way as banking. It is safe to say that crypto and mining is future for governments and governments around the world are trying to stop it (IRS has a $650,000 bounty for who can crack monero) so instead of promoting a safe and stable currency why are we guys not spreading it into market till such an extent that we use crypto to buy veggies, only then will crypto turn from something like stocks-HOLD to the moon BS to real currency just like the USD ,GBP ,EUR and others

As much as crypto is good, and should be allowed for normal use, miners are now imo exploiting this, and whilst it should be allowed for legitimate use, people shouldn't be able to hog the entire countries GPU and power source for mining. If you think about that in an environmental aspect, it is only taking cold air in and hot air out. That power could be used in other areas or application where heating is actually necessary, and even if it isn't, it's only causing harm to the environment. If some kind of limit to mining was imposed, then the difficulty for mining will be lower too, and people at home with their single RTX3080 will make more money (distributes the wealth a bit more evenly across the platform), and the rich won't be able to scale up their mining as they now don't have enough electricity left in their "budget" which could be imposed by the government using smart meters. 

[Moonzy]

11 minutes ago, RTX 3090 said:

everyone should have a reasonable power limit like 20-30kwh per day, and they can't have anything beyond that

I'm sorry but I can't stop laughing while imagining Timmy and his friends played too much minecraft so their electricity got cut, leaving his Granny that's on life support next door to die

 

This could be a decent idea but who gets to decide how much and based on what?

How often will the limit have to be revised? Because things don't really get revised that often from the government

Take speed limit for example, they were for cars from the 80s or something, with vastly less safety and what not, at least that's what I read somewhere

 

And technically we have a limit on how many kwh we can pull, it's based on how many amps your breaker is

[RTX 3090]

Just now, Moonzy said:

I'm sorry but I can't stop laughing while imagining Timmy and his friends played too much minecraft so their electricity got cut, leaving his Granny that's on life support in the next door to die

 

This could be a decent idea but who gets to decide how much and based on what?

How often will the limit have to be revised? Because things don't really get revised that often from the government

Take speed limit for example, they were for cars from the 80s or something, with vastly less safety and what not, at least that's what I read somewhere

 

And technically we have a limit on how many kwh we can pull, it's based on how many amps your breaker is

Maybe it doesn't have to be implemented immediately, it could first give them a warning and if they consistently go over limit, then action could be taken against them. They could then choose to shut off their supply or pay 5x the rate, if they are only using it for legitimate purposes

[Moonzy]

4 minutes ago, RTX 3090 said:

for legitimate purposes

So who gets to decide what's legitimate?

 

4 minutes ago, RTX 3090 said:

They could then choose to shut off their supply or pay 5x the rate,

Also, tiered billing exists

I pay 2x more for every kwh after 300 in my country

[RTX 3090]

Just now, Moonzy said:

So who gets to decide what's legitimate?

No one, but the main reason they are mining there is because the electricity is super cheap, and if they are paying 5x the rate for it, they would be sensible enough to stop mining there as it would no longer be cost efficient at 5x the rate. 

 

6 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

And technically we have a limit on how many kwh we can pull, it's based on how many amps your breaker is

that is the current limit, and it is way to high, you can pull at least 100a from there. The limit could be high at first, then lowered down as needed. For example business up till a certain size can have a 500kwh daily limit, and houses could have 100. If they find that is still to high, they can slowly lower it. This would also push businesses and consumers into investing in more power efficient technology, and only using resources when they need them, instead of leaving devices on 247

[Moonzy]

1 minute ago, RTX 3090 said:

as it would no longer be cost efficient at 5x the rate.

You might want to visit a mining calculator site, because I did a calc for someone based off $1 per kwh, which is about 8x the US avg of ~0.12c, and still come out green, albeit not that enticing

 

But yes I get your point

 

2 minutes ago, RTX 3090 said:

that is the current limit, and it is way to high, you can pull at least 100a from there. The limit could be high at first, then lowered down as needed. For example business up till a certain size can have a 500kwh daily limit, and houses could have 100. If they find that is still to high, they can slowly lower it. This would also push businesses and consumers into investing in more power efficient technology, and only using resources when they need them, instead of leaving devices on 247

This would be counterintuitive to how technology progress.

An average person uses more technology today than 10 years ago, so the power consumption only rises

Things do get more efficient but we get more things too

 

And for example, I've debated with my friends about the use of electric stove vs gas stove, how would you tackle that? Wouldn't you just push people to go back to cooking with gas and relying on coal or smth during the winter?

[GDRRiley]

58 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

Get the weatherman, he's buying up all the GPU

how do you feel about 6K A100 being bought and in racks?

[RTX 3090]

Just now, Moonzy said:

You might want to visit a mining calculator site, because I did a calc for someone based off $1 per kwh, which is about 8x the US avg of ~0.12c, and still come out green, albeit not that enticing

 

The rate can increase exponentially as they continue to go over the limit. 

1 minute ago, Moonzy said:

An average person uses more technology today than 10 years ago, so the power consumption only rises

Things do get more efficient but we get more things too

I know we also have more stuff then before, but we an still make things as efficient as it can be. For example you can insulate the house as much on possible, really thoroughly, and you would only need to heat it for a short while, and then it would retain the heat for a long time. I know it might not be feasible immediately, but that limit needs to be in place, even if it is really high right now, and then can slowly be lowered. Another example is that more people will justify the cost of solar panels instead of going over limit on their meters. 

5 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

And for example, I've debated with my friends about the use of electric stove vs gas stove, how would you tackle that? Wouldn't you just push people to go back to cooking with gas and relying on coal or smth during the winter?

Gas does burn cleaner then oil, and it would be good for cooking and unusable for mining. Maybe the gov can get gas supplies to more houses, and encourage them to use that for cooking and heating, as it will not have a limit, because it is unusable to miners (unless they get massive generators which I highly doubt)

[Moonzy]

1 minute ago, RTX 3090 said:

Gas does burn cleaner then oil, and it would be good for cooking and unusable for mining. Maybe the gov can get gas supplies to more houses, and encourage them to use that for cooking and heating, as it will not have a limit, because it is unusable to miners (unless they get massive generators which I highly doubt)

Gas in my country comes in cylinders:

1) those who supply the cylinders refuse to sell you one unless you buy gas from them and only them (market monopoly basically)

No our government have better things to do than tackling this, third world country and all.

2) imagine hauling gas tank up a flight of stairs every few weeks, it's not for everyone, especially elderly

 

4 minutes ago, RTX 3090 said:

know we also have more stuff then before, but we an still make things as efficient as it can be. For example you can insulate the house as much on possible, really thoroughly, and you would only need to heat it for a short while, and then it would retain the heat for a long time. I know it might not be feasible immediately, but that limit needs to be in place, even if it is really high right now, and then can slowly be lowered.

Sounds to me like this would limit consumer technology progression tbh.

 

Let's imagine a scenario, GPU doesn't exists in the market yet, so the avg power consumption of users are low and the limit is low

Will GPU be made if it'll bring the user's electricity over the limit, thus incurring heavy charges?

People would probably not purchase a GPU and thus no GPU would exists.

 

7 minutes ago, RTX 3090 said:

Another example is that more people will justify the cost of solar panels instead of going over limit on their meters.

Mining made me install solar because the cost can easily be justified