@somarasu @thomasfuchs Not really a big deal. Mozilla are just saying they are happy to take your crypto donations as dollars through a partner. 🤷 Just like Wikipedia do.

@matt @somarasu @thomasfuchs I briefly entertained that thought. "Accepting donations in ponzicoins is just another way to receive money"

But for a nonprofit (of sorts), who you accept donations from (and even more, seek donations from) can be pretty damning, and right now people are shilling pretty hard for ponzicurrencies. Even worse, cryptobros have a vested interest in Mozilla's business, so it is extra concerning.

@thomasfuchs > planet incinerating

I knew jwz was stupid but I didn't think he was this stupid

@feld @thomasfuchs It's a bit of an exaggeration, but the environmental impacts of crypto are well known. :/

@Angle no, they're not. The myths about its environmental impact is very well known, though.

Crypto mining (PoW) is a race to the bottom for the cheapest energy possible. It's the only way to be profitable. Guess where the cheapest energy on the planet comes from and what the environmental impacts of it are?

* Hydro
* Geothermal
* Wind

... especially in remote areas where the power can't be exported but you can run a satellite network for the blockchain. Weird, neither of these pollute?


* Natural Gas: trapped/extra being used to generate power for mining instead of flaring it off. Unfathomable amounts of wasted gas nobody pays attention to because only the oil/gas industry knows about it and it's too expensive or too low pressure to capture it and run the pipeline

* Nuclear -- requires a base load to be viable, and mining solves that. Not cheapest, but Nuclear is important as a sustainable and reliable energy source and they'll sell in bulk at a cheap rate to solve their problems.

* Part time solar/wind generation -- did you know we have solar and wind farms all over that have a huge amount of energy not being consumed because the transmission lines are too small or the area it's feeding has low demand? Mining actually makes their operation economically viable and encourages the creation of more renewables even in areas where demand would normally be low. And then when demand goes up, the mining scales back.

Amazing. It's like this stuff is actually useful and helps both energy companies, green transition, and doesn't harm the planet.

Anyone dumb enough to launch a mining operation using expensive energy will just go out of business. And renewables are winning. So the laws of capitalism dictate that the winners will use the cheapest energy available from anywhere on the planet.

So really people need to find a more believable smear attack on crypto.
was too late to tag @taylan in this -- but here you go
@feld @Angle

OK, cool hypotheses but I could come up with counter-arguments to those points without even really being into the topic that much.

I don't think this is something where either side can prove themselves correct with a few paragraphs of amateur analysis. Is there any peer-reviewed scientific literature on the topic, from people who are actual experts in energy management, climactic impact of electricity generation, sustainable infrastructure, and so on?

Until I see some proper scientific research on the topic, I'll have to consider the arguments of both sides about equally plausible. I guess I'd currently categorize myself as crypto-skeptic rather than anti-crypto, to be clear. Very generally speaking, "not having to generate shittons of energy for something" seems like a better idea than "having to generate shittons of energy for something." Just on a basic level. Hence the skepticism.

@feld @Angle
jwz may be wrong but Mozilla is still a cheat and a liar who doesn't deserve your money.
And the last stand against Chrome monopoly. Sigh....

@wolf480pl @feld @Angle Mozilla is the ticket against anti-trust for Google, they're partners.

Why the fuck would Mozilla be anti-Google? Never was, never will be.

@lanodan @Angle @feld
You're betting that Google will get hit with an antitrust *and* lose the lawsuit after Firefox disappears. That's not a sure thing, and having Firefox and Chrome is marginally better than having only Chrome

@wolf480pl @Angle @feld I have no bet there, that said Google is in an ongoing antitrust and Firefox barely has a user-share anymore.

All I'm saying: Mozilla hasn't been standing against Google and they don't seem likely to ever stand against them.

@lanodan @Angle @feld but they stand between me and being forced to use whatever crap Google decides to add to Chrome

@wolf480pl @Angle @feld Are you aware that parts of Google Chrome have been leaking into Firefox?

IIRC Google SafeBrowsing is into Firefox and enabled by default, this is effectively letting Google say to normal people which website is trustable or not. (And I'm pretty sure it also allows to know which website in the Alexa top 1000 someone is visiting…)

The only current client-side implementation other than the WIP one in GStreamer is libWebRTC, which is a gigantic blob of code with among other things it's own SSL/TLS library (BoringSSL, GPL-incompatible), which seems unremovable enough for webkit-gtk to just not have WebRTC entirely.
You seem to think I care about opinions of people who aren't paying my bills
@hypolite no, someone far more successful in influencing the direction of the internet is
@hypolite how does jwz justify his unbounded ego as child king of the entire web?

@thomasfuchs Honestly, they should have been accepting these donations the whole time, just not advertising it. Put it somewhere on the site, probably in the fine print, cash it out the moment it comes in, and neither promote [current-generation] cryptocurrency nor try to use its flash popularity (including negative press and feelings) to bolster their (Mozilla's) own visibility.

This post is just Mozilla forcing their open hand just that much further into your face.

@thomasfuchs Unpopular opinion, but I support payment with #cryptocurrency.
But I see why not everyone will support it. I have zero crypto, actually.
Here’s the opposing side (or in your case, your side): drewdevault.com/2021/04/26/Cry

@thomasfuchs oof lmoa

not his best moment, but i guess it goes to show nobody is immune to propaganda

@fluffy

i'd second that eth is a ponzi. i'd even go further and say its a scam.

@thomasfuchs

@mk @thomasfuchs why tell me about your crackpot theories friend? i have no idea who you even are

@fluffy

does this shitcoin scale yet? or is it still marketing hopium products?

@mk ETH? 160 billion locked. seems to scale pretty well although some of the newer guys are definitely making inroads
@thomasfuchs did Mozilla run out of money to pay their CEO? Otherwise, why do they need it? It’s not that they are making software these days :ablobheadshake:
@thomasfuchs
fuck around: say something on twitter
find out: get a twitter user angry

I'm flabbergasted

@thomasfuchs I'm assuming then that that's not the same Mozilla founder that started Brave and using everyone's browser as a coin miner.

@thomasfuchs epic bants. i hope the one-upmanship continues all the way to Al Gore.😆

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!