By Bitcoin.com - 2 tahun yang lalu - Masa Membaca: 4 minit
Yayasan Wikimedia Mendebatkan Penerimaan Derma Matawang Kripto Atas Kebimbangan Alam Sekitar
Berikutan keputusan Mozilla untuk menjeda derma crypto kerana kebimbangan alam sekitar, sebilangan ahli komuniti Yayasan Wikimedia telah mengemukakan cadangan yang meminta yayasan itu berhenti menerima sumbangan mata wang digital. Cadangan itu menjelaskan bahawa derma kripto "menisyaratkan [suatu] pengesahan ruang mata wang kripto," dan juga mengatakan bahawa "mata wang kripto mungkin tidak sejajar dengan komitmen Yayasan Wikimedia terhadap kelestarian alam sekitar."
Tuntutan Cadangan Mata Wang Kripto Mungkin Tidak Sejajar Dengan Yayasan 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 mula menerima 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.
Walau bagaimanapun, cadangan 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:
Adakah anda sedar bahawa sistem perbankan tradisional juga menggunakan tenaga?
Individu Bertegas 'Setiap Perkara Adalah Tidak Benar dan/atau Mengelirukan'
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 and 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).”
Pengulas Serlahkan Bias Berpunca daripada 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 pekerja 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 tidak tepat, as many others have discovered, and the Digiconomist’s work is loaded with discrepancies. One individual wrote:
Digiconomist bukan sahaja berat sebelah dan berkonflik. De Vries diterbitkan sendiri, tidak mempunyai proses semakan editorial dan dia mempunyai reputasi buruk untuk semakan fakta dan ketepatan.
Pada masa penulisan ini, terdapat sebilangan besar individu yang menentang cadangan yang dikemukakan oleh Gorillawarfare, tetapi sebahagian besar undian dan komen menyokong idea itu. Nampaknya komuniti crypto dan penyokong bukti kerja (PoW) mesti bekerja lebih keras untuk menghapuskan mitos yang beredar daripada pakar media arus perdana, pengawal kewangan lama dan penyelidik pembangkang bergaji.
Apakah pendapat anda tentang cadangan Yayasan Wikimedia yang mencadangkan yayasan berhenti menerima aset kripto atas kebimbangan alam sekitar? Beritahu kami pendapat anda tentang subjek ini di bahagian komen di bawah.
Sumber asal: Bitcoin.com