By Bitcoin.com - hai 2 anos - Tempo de lectura: 4 minutos
A Fundación Wikimedia debate sobre a aceptación das doazóns de criptomoedas por cuestións ambientais
Tras a decisión de Mozilla de deter as doazóns de criptomonedas por motivos ambientais, varios membros da comunidade da Fundación Wikimedia presentaron unha proposta que lle pide á fundación que deixe de aceptar doazóns de moeda dixital. A proposta explica que as doazóns de criptomonedas "sinalizan [un] respaldo ao espazo das criptomoedas" e tamén di que "as criptomoedas poden non estar aliñadas co compromiso da Fundación Wikimedia coa sustentabilidade ambiental".
Alegacións da proposta As criptomoedas poden non aliñarse coa Fundación Wikimedia
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 comezou a aceptar 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.
Con todo, a proposta 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:
Sabes que o sistema bancario tradicional tamén utiliza enerxía?
O individuo insiste en "Cada punto é falso e/ou enganoso"
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).”
Os comentaristas destacan o sesgo derivado do Digiconomist
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 empregado 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 impreciso, as many others have discovered, and the Digiconomist’s work is loaded with discrepancies. One individual wrote:
Digiconomist non só é parcial e conflitivo. De Vries publicouse por si mesmo, non ten un proceso de revisión editorial e ten unha mala reputación de verificación de feitos e precisión.
No momento de escribir este artigo, hai unha infinidade de persoas que están en contra da proposta presentada por Gorillawarfare, pero a maior parte dos votos e comentarios apoian a idea. Parece que a comunidade criptográfica e os defensores da proba de traballo (PoW) deben traballar máis para disipar os mitos que circulan entre os expertos dos principais medios de comunicación, a antiga garda financeira e os investigadores pagados da oposición.
Que opinas da proposta da Fundación Wikimedia que suxire que a fundación deixe de aceptar criptoactivos por cuestións ambientais? Díganos o que pensa sobre este tema na sección de comentarios a continuación.
Orixe orixinal: Bitcoin.com