By Bitcoin.com - duela 2 urte - Irakurtzeko denbora: 4 minutu
Wikimedia Fundazioak Kriptomoneta dohaintzak onartzea eztabaidatzen du ingurumen kontuengatik
Mozillak kripto-dohaintzak eteteko erabakiaren ondoren, ingurumen-kezka dela eta, Wikimedia Fundazioaren komunitateko kide batzuek proposamen bat aurkeztu dute fundazioari moneta digitalaren dohaintzak onartzeari uzteko eskatzen diona. Proposamenak azaltzen du kripto-dohaintzek "kriptografia-moneta espazioaren onarpena adierazten dutela" eta "kriptomonetak agian ez direla bat etorriko Wikimedia Fundazioak ingurumen-iraunkortasunarekin duen konpromisoarekin".
Proposamenaren erreklamazioak Cryptocurrencies Baliteke Wikimedia Fundazioarekin bat ez egitea
Members of the Wikimedia Foundation are voting on a proposal that could stop the foundation from accepting digital currencies like bitcoin and ethereum. The U.S. non-profit onartzen hasi zen crypto assets in 2019 via Bitpay. “We accept donations globally, and we strive to provide a large variety of donation options. It’s very important that we can get international donations processed in ways that are efficient and cost-effective,” Pats Pena, director of payments and operations at Wikimedia Foundation said at the time.
Hala ere, a Proposamen submitted by the user dubbed “Gorillawarfare” claims that accepting crypto donations goes against specific Wikimedia Foundation principles. “Cryptocurrencies may not align with the Wikimedia Foundation’s commitment to environmental sustainability. Bitcoin and ethereum are the two most highly-used cryptocurrencies, and are both proof-of-work, using an enormous amount of energy,” the proposal says.
While the proposal mentions the Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index it leverages a lot of the research done by the Digiconomist’s Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index. The proposal seems to have a lot of support as voting members left comments signaling affirmation. “Long overdue. Accepting cryptocurrency makes a joke out of the WMF’s commitment to environmental sustainability,” Wikimedia user Gamaliel said. However, not everyone agreed and in fact, there are a great number of people who voiced the opposite opinion. In reply to Gamaliel’s statement, for instance, one person wrote:
Badakizu banku sistema tradizionalak ere energia erabiltzen duela?
Norbanakoak "Puntu bakoitza gezurra edo/edo engainagarria" dela azpimarratzen du
There is some discussion from a few people’s submitted comments that insists Wikimedia Foundation members should realize the U.S. dollar is backed by significant amounts of carbon energy worst of all, state-enforced violence. One person explained that each point that Gorillawarfare brought up in the proposal “is untrue and/or misleading.” For example, the point about being aligned with the crypto industry’s so-called values. The individual retorted that “this is not true, any more than accepting USD signals endorsement of the U.S. Dollar or the U.S. Government.”
In reply to the environmental concerns Gorillawarfare introduced in the proposal, the individual explained that the proposal’s point is conflated. “The proposal conflates the existence of Bitcoin to merely using it,” the Wikimedia Foundation member Awwright opined. “The proposal does not demonstrate that dropping acceptance of Bitcoin (or other cryptocurrency) will actually have an effect. As a technical matter, there is no direct relationship between making a Bitcoin transaction and energy usage (that’s significantly more than the domestic banking system).”
Iruzkinek Digiconomist-en ondoriozko alborapena nabarmentzen dute
Furthermore, there are many complaints about Gorillawarfare citing the Digiconomist, as the researcher’s work has been widely dismissed over inaccuracies and extreme bias. “Digiconomist is a blog run by Alex de Vries, who is an enplegatu of De Nederlandsche Bank NV (DNB), the central bank of the Netherlands, which is a direct competitor to Bitcoin,” one of the comments against Gorillawarfare’s proposal notes. Another individual explained that the Digiconomist’s work is zehaztugabeak, as many others have discovered, and the Digiconomist’s work is loaded with discrepancies. One individual wrote:
Digiconomist ez da alboratzailea eta gatazkatsua soilik. De Vries bere burua argitaratu da, ez du berrikuspen prozesu editorialik eta ospe txarra du gertakariak egiaztatzeko eta zehaztasunerako.
Idazketa idazteko unean, hainbat pertsona daude Gorillawarfare-k aurkeztutako proposamenaren aurka, baina botoen eta iruzkinen zati handiena ideia onartzen du. Badirudi kripto-komunitateak eta proof-of-work (PoW) bultzatzaileek gehiago lan egin behar dutela komunikabide nagusien adituengandik, finantza-guardia zaharraren eta oposizioko ikertzaileen artean zirkulatzen ari diren mitoak uxatzeko.
Zer deritzozu fundazioak kripto-aktiboak onartzeari uztea iradokitzen duen Wikimedia Fundazioaren proposamenari buruz, ingurumen-arloan? Esan iezaguzu zer pentsatzen duzun gai honi buruz beheko iruzkinen atalean.
Jatorrizko iturria: Bitcoin.com