08:32:25 RRSAgent has joined #sustainability 08:32:25 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/10/19-sustainability-irc 08:32:27 RRSAgent, stay 08:32:31 RRSAgent, this meeting spans midnight 08:32:35 RRSAgent, make log public 12:06:53 jeff has joined #sustainability 12:23:58 dezell has joined #sustainability 15:48:28 dietrich_ has joined #sustainability 16:12:04 jyasskin has joined #sustainability 22:59:03 jeff has joined #sustainability 23:38:34 fantasai has joined #sustainability 23:55:30 takio has joined #sustainability 23:58:57 Zakim has joined #sustainability 23:59:11 present+ 23:59:32 tantek has joined #sustainability 00:00:23 gerald has joined #sustainability 00:00:24 Jay has joined #sustainability 00:00:31 db has joined #sustainability 00:00:33 Ralph has joined #sustainability 00:00:46 present+ 00:00:54 marie_s has joined #sustainability 00:01:03 plh has joined #sustainability 00:01:15 kirkwood has joined #sustainability 00:01:25 present+ 00:01:41 present+ 00:01:44 AramZS has joined #sustainability 00:01:47 present+ 00:01:51 present+ 00:02:00 Eric_Siow has joined #Sustainability 00:02:19 present+ 00:02:31 Scribenick: fantasai 00:02:38 Topic: Recording 00:02:50 tantek: Do we want to record the session? Does anyone have a preference? 00:03:18 Jake: I would prefer recorded, to be able to refer back. 00:04:46 present+ 00:04:55 bdekoz has joined #sustainability 00:05:10 jake_ has joined #sustainability 00:05:13 tantek: OK, seems no one is opposed, so we'll record the meeting 00:05:15 Topic: Sustainability 00:05:20 tantek: Welcome to session 00:05:28 tantek: I'm Tantek Çelik 00:05:41 tantek: at W3C for quite some time, also AC rep of Mozilla 00:05:54 tantek: Here to talk about sustainability and environmental concerns of what we do here at W3C 00:06:05 tantek: Will share some relevant links 00:06:48 tantek: A few points I wanted to go over 00:06:55 tantek: outline of the urgency 00:07:19 tantek: Something that's changed recently, and why topic particularly interesting this year 00:07:22 tantek: is the IPCC report this year 00:07:38 tantek: Gave us the most dire warning we've ever seen about the state of the climate crisis and our impact on it 00:07:47 tantek: driven by energy usage, fossil fuels in particular 00:08:17 tantek: Report was significant enough stepping up of the importance of why this is urgent that folks like the BBC, usually a restrained publication, used expressions like "code red for humanity" 00:08:22 tantek: I think it's not an understatement 00:08:49 tantek: If areas we're involved in can make situation much worse, or can make the situation better, then that's something to keep in mind with the work that we do and the things we create 00:08:59 Press release of the report: https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/ 00:09:06 tantek: I wanted to start with the first principle, which is, can we actually follow Hippocratic Oath here, and "do no harm" here as well' 00:09:07 Report in detail - https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/ 00:09:13 tantek: Don't harm the patient, don't harm the planet 00:09:19 tantek: Especially can we do no new harms 00:09:29 tantek: Closest we have to that here at W3C is the TAG's Ethical Web Principles 00:09:37 Mentioned BBC report: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58130705 00:09:43 tantek: Especially, "Web must be environmentally sustainable platform" 00:09:59 tantek: Talk not only about power consumption (which is primary source of makign things worse, via carbon emissions) 00:10:08 tantek: but also impact of devices thrown away, hardware turnover 00:10:24 tantek: As much as standards we make shape updates to software, how does it affect how long you can use the device before needing to buy a new device 00:10:25 Our ethical web principles, anchor linked to discussed section - https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/ethical-web-principles/#sustainable 00:10:27 db has joined #sustainability 00:10:33 tantek: Right now only a TAG Ethical Web Principle 00:10:43 Note: electricity != emissions 00:10:44 tantek: As part of Do No Harm, I'd like to encourage us to place sustainability 00:10:53 tantek: alongside accessibility and internationalization 00:10:58 tantek: those are well-accepted areas of horizontal review 00:11:10 All electricity generation on the planet accounts for about 25% of global emissions 00:11:20 tantek: and areas where, if there are blocking items, that are harmful for a11y or i18n, we stop and say, need to fix this first 00:11:37 Vagner has joined #sustainability 00:11:41 naomi has joined #Sustainability 00:11:43 tantek: I propose that we adopt that same level of pulling the emergency brake, as it were, for horizontal reviews of sustainability 00:12:13 tantek: for energy use or device obsolence, should review whether it causes some non-trivial increase in energy use or lifespan of devices 00:12:20 tantek: On the other hand, if spec can reduce energy -- 00:12:30 Note: between 50-60% of electricity generated every year is totally lost to waste - the inability to feasibly use the electricity generated 00:12:32 rgrant has joined #sustainability 00:12:33 tantek: Which standards often do, because standards allow for increased efficiency in many cases 00:12:42 tantek: We should also avoid amplifying existing known harms 00:12:49 tantek: areas of tech that we know are harmful to environment 00:12:55 tantek: key area here that I think has an impact here 00:13:03 tantek: is what are tech areas that are consuming lots of energy? 00:13:13 tantek: enough that it can be measured in comparison to energy consumption of entire countries 00:13:24 Energy != emissions, a fallacy is being posed right now 00:13:25 tantek: biggest one there is proof of work blockchains, Bitcoin in particular 00:13:43 NYT article may be the worst article on this subject ever written 00:13:48 tantek: NYTimes did an infographic on how mining one BTC was very small amoutn of energy, but now uses more electricity than most countries 00:13:57 tantek: This is an area where we know there's harm happening 00:14:03 Page 43 of the IPCC's report on global warning specifies energy emission and power plants as an issue - https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/faqs/IPCC_AR6_WGI_FAQs.pdf 00:14:09 tantek: there is disproportionate use of energy 00:14:13 ??: What's the net emissions? 00:14:17 q+ 00:14:32 s/??/db/ 00:14:41 tantek: One reason, in this case, bitcoin usage of electricity, some proportion causing emissions is something that on its own is causing harm 00:14:48 q+ to suggest that a precautionary principle against using energy is not appropriate when human rights are at risk 00:14:59 tantek: were we to legitimize its use as part of a standards, we know that the network effects of Web would exponentially increase use of that technology 00:15:04 tantek: so that's a decision before us 00:15:07 +q 00:15:12 Note: statements are being posed as fact that are not just disputed, they are abjectly false 00:15:15 tantek: not only should we not standardize on Bitcoin, should avoid legitimizing it 00:15:20 tantek: one argument has been to let markets decide 00:15:26 tantek: example here is DID specification 00:15:35 q+ to push back against web usage making Bitcoin usage exponentially more harmful 00:15:39 Note this report on bitcoin mining reopening power plants that were closed specifically because of air quality issues - https://apnews.com/article/bitcoin-mining-new-york-power-plant-climate-change-516dbd319394a6a30f83d94947abad20 00:15:49 q+ 00:15:49 tantek: I will push back on that a little bit because as we are seeing the existing cryptocurrency markets themselves, they're demonstrating that they're optimized for financial gain at the expense of all other considerations 00:16:01 tantek: there are groups starting new fossil fuel power plants just to mine Bitcoin 00:16:18 tantek: Can find examples in popular media easily 00:16:22 Bitcoin emissions also have huge pressures to find sustainable energy. You can learn more here: https://niccarter.info/wp-content/uploads/TBW-Presentation-Template_2021_nc.pdf 00:16:26 tantek: That's happening on its own, and we don't want to amplify that 00:16:37 tantek: SO 1. Don't do harm 2. Don't amplify existing harm 00:16:40 The vast majority of POW use is with green and renewable sources 00:16:43 tantek: Third example is to reduce existing non-trivial harms 00:16:57 tantek: examples 00:17:00 the estimate is well over a supermajority of consumption 00:17:04 tantek: Here's a study recently published by EU 00:17:16 q+ 00:17:23 tantek: found double-digits percentage of energy usage on smartphones is caused by unwanted ad tech 00:17:37 tantek: This is an existing envirionmental harm, coming directly from Web usage on mobile phones today 00:17:56 Note: POW systems are projected to be GHG neutral or negative in the next 10-15 years 00:17:57 tantek: So can W3C look into reduce these effects, which are unrelated to the uses of the Web that users want 00:18:03 Speaker has cited: https://groenlinks.nl/sites/groenlinks/files/2021-09/CE_Delft_210166_Carbon_footprint_unwanted_data-use_smartphones.pdf 00:18:03 tantek: This is btw in priority order 00:18:11 tantek: 1. Don't add new harms, add HR to catch those 00:18:17 tantek: 2. Don't amplify existing 00:18:28 tantek: 3. If areas we can reduce Web's energy usage over time, that's where we need to be 00:18:36 tantek: I took these from IPCC report 00:18:42 tantek: It's not good enough to go carbon neutral 00:18:49 tantek: The report was that we need to reduce the total 00:19:01 tantek: not just net zero, but aiming as close to actual zero as we can 00:19:03 Also worth noting when discussing the impact of bitcoin mining on less robust energy ecosystems outside of US/Canada/Europe - https://gizmodo.com/iran-bans-crypto-mining-after-months-of-blackouts-1846991039 00:19:04 tantek: Those are my 3 points 00:19:07 I suggest 4: don't shoot yourself in the foot by ignoring positive value from using energy. Unfortunately, it's not compatible with purely reducing energy usage. 00:19:16 tantek: In response to some of these, I want to address some common arguments 00:19:22 tantek: "what about"-ism 00:19:27 tantek: common enough method of argument, or fallacy 00:19:28 q+ 00:19:31 tantek: entire wikipedia page aobut it 00:19:31 Whataboutism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism 00:19:44 tantek: "What about energy usage of CSS?" "What about energy usage of video on the Web?" 00:19:55 tantek: It's an attempt to deflect from the point being made to a different argument 00:20:10 tantek: short version is, if worried about energy production, but largest sources the most 00:20:19 tantek: we don't see e.g. NYT writing about energy consumption of CSS 00:20:25 tantek: very few about video 00:20:30 tantek: much less than proof of work blockchain 00:20:36 They don't write about clothes dryer consumption because it's not a hot topic they think they can drive clicks to 00:20:40 tantek: So as much as I want an open discussion, woudl want to avoid such style of arguments 00:20:42 Additional article about local climate impact created by mining - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/07/bitcoin-power-plant-is-turning-a-12000-year-old-glacial-lake-into-a-hot-tub/ 00:20:46 tantek: Second style of argument is the nirvana fallacy 00:21:02 Nirvana Fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy 00:21:06 tantek: Style of argument in which comparison of actual functioning system with proposal, which worked as expected, would be a better replacement for existing system 00:21:43 tantek: That's often used in various Bitcoin arguments, in terms of fiat currencies consuming huge amount of energy to run (depending how you measure it), and if we switch everything to Bitcoin, would use less energy 00:21:51 tantek: but that's comparing a theoretical system with an existing system 00:21:59 tantek: so that's why consider it a nirvana argument 00:22:07 tantek: That's it for prepared remarks 00:22:35 q? 00:22:42 ack db 00:22:47 An additional rather long article that runs through some of the common objections to the bitcoin<>mining energy question - https://ketanjoshi.co/2021/03/11/bitcoin-is-a-mouth-hungry-for-fossil-fuels/ 00:23:14 db: Want to make a few remarks. Ignoring fallacies. Everything we do as technologists has impact on energy use, so we have to compare things. 00:23:20 db: Electricity is not emissions 00:23:40 db: In long scheme of time, electricity will be carbon-free 00:23:46 db: Emissions is not electricity 00:23:52 db: Article in NY Times is worst article 00:23:59 db: They focus on electricity number. It drives clicks 00:24:06 db: As much electricity as this tiny island! 00:24:15 db: But they didn't dig into emissions, because it takes more work 00:24:17 db: but other people did 00:24:19 Here's an article that digs into emissions from The Telegraph - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2021/01/28/inside-dirty-world-bitcoin-mining/ 00:24:27 db: Global emissions is 25% from electricity 00:24:36 db: So something consuming 0.25% of electricity 00:24:43 db: is only 1/4 of that is emissions 00:24:54 Here is a critique of the NYT's reporting on Bitcoin (i think it's a different article, but same topic) https://medium.com/@nic__carter/on-bitcoin-the-gray-lady-embraces-climate-lysenkoism-a2d31e465ec0 00:24:55 db: for Bitcoin, would be 0.35% of emissions [??] 00:25:19 Here's the NYT's article I think (not sure if this is the one) - https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/09/03/climate/bitcoin-carbon-footprint-electricity.html 00:25:29 db: But Bitcoin is one of the greenest verticals on the planet 00:25:54 db: Bitcoin .. % renewable 00:26:03 Here's a defended analysis of Bitcoin's carbon footprint - https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/ 00:26:14 db: Bitcoin is 50-70% reneable 00:26:28 db: One reason is that renewable is not timable 00:26:35 db: and Bitcoin can use the excess at non-peak times 00:26:43 db: Flare gas is a net negative carbon 00:26:59 db: Bitcoin miners are going around, capping the stacks, and creating a net negative carbon emission 00:27:05 db: by using electricity from these 00:27:18 db: Bitcoin is 3x cleaner than average grid 00:27:27 db: That gives you roughtly 0.045% of emissions 00:27:35 Here's a published study that is part of the above's source, but notable enough to pull out. The abstract notes: "[we] estimate Bitcoin's e-waste and find that it adds up to 30.7 metric kilotons annually, per May 2021. This number is comparable to the amount of small IT and telecommunication equipment waste produced by a country like the Netherlands" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344921005103?dgcid=author 00:27:43 db: If we look even deeper, the majority of electricity used by Bitcoin over 50% is waste electricity 00:27:56 db: 50-60% of electricity generated every year is wasted, because it can't be stored 00:28:05 db: Bitcoin looks for these sources, because it's the cheapest 00:28:07 It especially notes that many have "thus far ignored that Bitcoin miners cycle through a growing amount of short-lived hardware that could exacerbate the growth in global e-waste." 00:28:13 db: On off-peak hours, they'll consume that electricity 00:28:21 db: So after you lop off half the electricity being waste electricity 00:28:29 db: end up with 0.0225% of emissions 00:28:33 db: and that's net attributable 00:28:41 db: This is what Bitcoin is actually adding 00:28:51 q? 00:29:01 db: It wouldn't be fair to knock Bitcoin for using waste electricity, etc. Need to consider what is it actually adding to carbon emissions. 00:29:27 tantek: OK, going to cut there at 5m. Don't want to spend 5min per article 00:29:37 Ahh, but don't forget my link about about how poorly NYT uses its facts. 00:29:40 tantek: A lot of the points you're making, to get to 100yrs from now, we have to survive the next 15 00:29:53 Bitcoin will be neutral or negative within 10-15 years 00:30:07 tantek: arguments about Bitcoin folks connecting to unused sources of energy are similarly taken up by folks setting up data centers in general, for actual user demand 00:30:21 tantek: how much of that energy could be used for general purpose Web, rather than just Bitcoin mining? 00:30:31 tantek: IF data center used for Bitcoin not being used for other purposes 00:30:40 tantek: lastly, push back on argument that Bitcoin is one of the greenest consumers 00:30:45 tantek: first don't believe it's well-established 00:30:49 You can't build datacenters near volcanos 00:31:00 q+ 00:31:07 tantek: and there's also a lot of Bitcoin buying up renewables and driving up price for cities, etc. 00:31:16 This is a false 0-sum argument 00:31:16 tantek: so it pushes other consumers to carbon-based sources 00:31:50 tantek: Lastly it's easy to find examples of Bitcoin miners literally firing up new fossil fuel plants to power Bitcoin mining 00:31:53 ack rgrant 00:31:53 rgrant, you wanted to suggest that a precautionary principle against using energy is not appropriate when human rights are at risk and to push back against web usage making Bitcoin 00:31:56 ... usage exponentially more harmful 00:32:23 ack jake_ 00:32:33 jake_: Glad to see work here happening 00:32:42 jake_: I'm Jake Holland, chairing Multitask CG 00:32:52 jake_: We believe sustainability is a benefit of trying to deploy multitask 00:32:53 https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200305-why-your-internet-habits-are-not-as-clean-as-you-think 00:33:01 jake_: One argument in chat is BBC writeup of study 00:33:30 jake_: In the 2019 study, using the Bitcoin comparison, the numbers they had had Bitcoin at something like 15th of the amount of video used 00:33:38 jake_: Video was coming in at 1% of total carbon emissions 00:33:48 jake_: This is the number I'm trying to pull down with our work 00:33:59 jake_: Many ? don't have to be in operation to .... 00:34:08 jake_: If there is content sufficent to make use of 00:34:28 jake_: But the day to day utilization, once it's there and deployed, ~20% of what's there, can rpobably be done with multitask 00:34:37 jake_: especially when running DoD on carousel 00:34:46 jake_: Not just about big live events, but they're why things break in the first place 00:34:56 jake_: Multitask CG is new, founded in June 00:35:07 jake_: In charter, I did go look for sustainability targetted groups, found 2 which I listed 00:35:27 jake_: Web we can afford, and nother specifically about sustainability 00:35:32 jake_: Is there an organized community trying to do this? 00:35:36 jake_: Seemed pretty dead from the archives 00:35:52 jake_: Other is, is there a way to leverage interest in these topics to promote the type of efficiency gains we want 00:36:00 jake_: and to get more buy-in from a broader audience 00:36:07 An assessment of multiple studies notes "the instant suspension of every project in the pipeline would make [a rise of global temperatures to] 2°C achievable only if accompanied by the decommissioning of one-fifth of all power plants running on fossil fuels (this estimate is as of 2018 – more years or decades of business-as-usual would raise the requirement)." - Pg 67 from "How to Blow Up a Pipeline" by Andreas Malm. 00:36:10 jake_: It's been a bit of a struggle to get people to ake it seriously 00:36:17 jake_: I work for Akamai, and doing work at IETF 00:36:31 jake_: now trying to get into Web context, because Web video makes up such a large amount if Internet traffic 00:36:35 jake_: What are the right next steps? 00:36:46 jake_: Can I join forces with anyone who is interested in this? 00:36:53 tantek: Definitely sympathize with that 00:37:03 tantek: That's why I proposed this session. 00:37:15 tantek: TAG is the closest thing to a home for this, because of the TAG Ethical Web Principle of sustainability 00:37:22 q? 00:37:22 tantek: some additional discussion on design principles 00:37:29 q+ 00:37:42 tantek: I would love to see a Sustainability Interest Group or something similar, that could serve a function similar to PING for horizontal review 00:38:02 +1 I like the idea of a review process for sustainability 00:38:09 tantek: I don't know what next steps are for that, but talk to your AC rep, I believe they have the ability to kick off a proposal to make this an actual interest group similar to Privacy, Security, i18n, etc. 00:38:20 tantek: And thanks for the background about Multitask, I didn't know about that 00:38:32 s/multitask/multicast 00:38:35 jake_: We are meeting next Weds, if anyone interested we'll be giving an intro 00:38:47 rgrant: Thanks for hosting this 00:38:51 q? 00:39:07 rgrant: I would like to suggest a precautionary principle against using additional energy is the wrong metric and the wrong value, because it's in conflict when human rights are at risk 00:39:18 rgrant: We have conflicting principles in the EWP 00:39:40 rgrant: I think when there are conflicting principles, then most of us in a pinch would prefer to save a human life 00:39:58 rgrant: I think as precautionary principle, if we say don't use extra energy, I think you mean we should not pollute additional carbon 00:40:00 Wenjing has joined #sustainability 00:40:11 Note: Excess use of energy towards unneeded uses can threaten human rights as well, worth noting. See: https://apnews.com/article/iran-media-social-media-bitcoin-coronavirus-pandemic-6d1c703a7faa1f85b0f94011259ec63e 00:40:11 rgrant: as Daniel pointed out, can use more electricity without extra emissions 00:40:22 rgrant: but principle doesn't allow us to rank our values 00:40:33 rgrant: that's one critical point against this idea that we should not use any additional energy 00:40:58 q? 00:41:00 rgrant: other thing that this argument ignores is that the W3C adopting DID methods which are decentralized, and which may allow people to create DID methods on top of Bitcoin, 00:41:07 rgrant: this will not change the demand for mining hash rate 00:41:11 Net zero or negative heating of homes/buildings: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/north-vancouver-bitcoin-mining-heating-lonsdale-energy-corporation 00:41:12 rgrant: it won't change the amount of carbon emitted 00:41:25 rgrant: other than a theoretical possibility of additional demand communicated through transaction fees 00:41:33 Worth noting that the "battery" argument is addressed here: https://www.ft.com/content/0448b44d-1d78-48f8-8ca8-6edae7976a5f 00:41:36 rgrant: I've calculated what the carbon cost of a transaction in Bitcoin is 00:41:37 Net negative reduction of greenhouse gases through flare capture: https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2261931-bitcoin-miners-help-us-oil-producers-cut-flaring 00:41:47 rgrant: this evening my calculation is it's about 285g of carbon 00:42:03 Average reduction in GHGs from flare capture: 00:42:04 Methan 98% CO2e 63% CO 95% VOC 100% NOx 89% 00:42:09 rgrant: to relate, that's less than half of the average American hot shower given average temp of 112degF etc. 00:42:18 The levels of reduction are astounding, and simply cannot be ignored 00:42:26 rgrant: making typical assumptions about sources of water/heat/etc 00:42:29 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oynOk_95jZRBWHfeuX_zdZ31C0j48vVU2EU2qDzj8DY 00:42:37 rgrant: I've been pasting into this google document ehre 00:42:45 rgrant: so please pardon incomplete state of doc 00:42:54 rgrant: to wrap this up, who decides what is more valuable/ 00:43:02 s#/#?# 00:43:14 rgrant: It is not W3C's place to say not to use a DID method that is truly decentralized 00:43:22 This is a great (albeit overly dramatic) recitation of the facts as they pertain to this topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-7dMVcVWgc 00:43:24 rgrant: those of us who did good work in DID space, think our method is the best 00:43:29 Q+ 00:43:33 rgrant: I think mine has some of the best decentralization characteristics 00:43:46 rgrant: Many others only require a few key players to be compromised to compromise the method 00:43:55 rgrant: controlled by governments etc. 00:43:59 rgrant: I think decentralization is a real benefit 00:44:12 rgrant: once you have real benefits, have to ask, is it appropriate to be working against this? 00:44:18 rgrant: and not asking, well, what can I work towards? 00:44:23 rgrant: I think that's not whataboutism 00:44:30 Bitcoin's path to net neutral/negative: https://nydig.com/bitcoin-net-zero/ 00:44:35 rgrant: I do think we need to dissolve our problems with nuclear energy 00:44:44 rgrant: unfortunatly 80s movement was against that 00:44:53 74 pages, one of the most conclusive, data-rich academic investigations in history 00:44:54 A good evenhanded article towards mining bitcoin with nuclear energy (at least imo) https://gizmodo.com/mining-bitcoin-using-nuclear-power-may-be-fine-actuall-1847825102 00:44:58 rgrant: but I want to help, I want to help keep reporters alive in other countries who are reporting sources of pollution 00:45:05 tantek: I understand motivation of wanting to help 00:45:13 tantek: I think we have different perspective on some of these things 00:45:21 tantek: I don't like "this principle vs other principle" antagonism 00:45:26 tantek: esp for sustainability 00:45:36 tantek: there's a lot of evidence that environmental harms directly harm human rights 00:45:54 tantek: one of the best ways to help human rights is environmental improvements, because harms will be worse 00:45:56 https://github.com/w3ctag/ethical-web-principles/issues/52#issuecomment-931379281 00:46:21 tantek: This is not whataboutism, but it is example of nirvana fallacy 00:46:29 tantek: ... 00:46:40 tantek: Not going to get argue about for or against human rights 00:46:45 tantek: of course support human rights 00:46:50 We just need another system that solves the chronological oracle problem to have a safe basis for digital identity 00:46:56 tantek: not follow that key to human rights is decentralization or any specific technology 00:47:02 are you against decentralization? 00:47:03 Anyone have another system that solves the chronological oracle problem? 00:47:04 q? 00:47:19 [fantasai points out time check] 00:47:28 ota has joined #sustainability 00:47:29 ack Jay 00:47:40 Jay: I'm happy to be in this discussion 00:47:49 Jay: I think that because of the time I will be briefl 00:47:59 Jay: I think we need as W3C, some kind of evidence-based 00:48:03 Jay: sustainability white paper 00:48:07 Jay: as a kind of horizontal issue 00:48:23 Jay: because at this moment the blockchain PoW is similar one to consume the energy 00:48:32 Jay: but each technology also consumes energy for computing 00:48:38 Jay: So in that sense, how to think of that issue? 00:48:43 A good paper here on the basis for understanding the questions of justice that come with " 00:48:49 Jay: We need a common understanding for sustainability at W3C 00:48:53 Jay: To do so we need evidence 00:48:55 environmental disorganization - https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article/53/6/997/418934 00:48:59 aside: on the cost of a bitcoin transaction: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/sep/17/waste-from-one-bitcoin-transaction-like-binning-two-iphones 00:49:09 Jay: If we can share such a white paper, it will be easy to understand the ? 00:49:15 Jay: So my proposal is to generate a white paper 00:49:18 tantek: excellent proposal 00:49:23 q? 00:49:25 ack Jeff 00:49:41 jeff: As background, I think we're conflating 2 topics here 00:49:47 jeff: One is do we need to focus on sustainability 00:49:56 jeff: Second topic is question around Bitcoin and DiDs 00:50:04 jeff: want to keep separate 00:50:13 jeff: On first topic, want to give tantek credit for raising this at a high level 00:50:19 jeff: I think this is challenge of our generation and next several 00:50:30 jeff: Given our values, I think it's embarassing we don't have such a focus 00:50:38 jeff: so +1 to idea of making that a stronger focus within W3C 00:50:52 jeff: But second topic raised, I think those illustrate some of the challenges of raising the topic 00:50:58 jeff: Different ppl have different points of view 00:51:05 jeff: Daniel raised the perspective about what's net attributable 00:51:13 jeff: and rgrant raised issue of human rights and tradeoffs 00:51:24 jeff: We depth need to be able to reason well about this topic 00:51:30 jeff: Suggestion of IG might be a good approach 00:51:37 jeff: We also need to build the expertise within our community 00:51:49 jeff: tantek raised examples of other values-based work like privacy, i18n, accessibility 00:51:59 jeff: It's taken years to build that expertise in our community 00:51:59 q? 00:52:06 ack jyasskin 00:52:06 jeff: so how do we build that expertise for sustainability? 00:52:17 jyasskin: Jeffrey Yasskin, Google Chrome 00:52:30 jyasskin: Agree with Jeff it would be useful to have sustainability principles and some kind of review for proposals in general 00:53:02 jyasskin: I generally agree with Tantek. Using cryptocurrency examples and DID as an example helps us show what we need to do to address sustainability 00:53:12 jyasskin: I agree with Tantek that these tech are net bad 00:53:17 All I have done is 200 hours of research, but I guess maybe others have done more 00:53:25 jyasskin: but we need to evaluate all technology, not just Bitcoin 00:53:35 jyasskin: not just ones we pay the most attention to 00:53:39 jyasskin: but be more objective about it 00:53:53 jyasskin: and let ppl negotiate and discuss and come to consensus about what the impacts actually are 00:53:58 jyasskin: 2 aspects to consider 00:54:01 [db, I was discounting your research, I was only suggesting that we need a place for people to share and talk about their different perspectives.] 00:54:03 jyasskin: There's choices in how to accomplish a goal 00:54:09 s/was/wasn't/ 00:54:13 jyasskin: ? and ? both have crypto and non-crypto methods 00:54:19 jyasskin: We can compare those methods 00:54:36 jyasskin: Lots of operations onto a main chain transaction 00:54:38 jyasskin: ... 00:54:43 Nice to see someone talking about the details here! 00:54:43 jyasskin: can write in sustainability review how they compare 00:54:46 s/? and ?/decentralized identifiers and verifiable credentials/ 00:54:49 Kudos 00:54:56 jyasskin: Currently Bitcoin is small wrt financial transactions 00:55:07 jyasskin: scaling up to all financial transactions would scale up, but that's not linear 00:55:11 jyasskin: would have to think about how we can measure 00:55:16 jyasskin: not something we can do in TPAC side session 00:55:21 no, carbon impact does not increase at all if more Bitcoin transactions occur. this is factually wrong. 00:55:25 jyasskin: Something needs to be done via consensus process into a specification 00:55:26 q? 00:55:32 ack Ralph 00:55:32 Ralph, you wanted to ask how we weigh deployed tech vs new tech 00:55:42 Ralph: Another topic for this future CG or IG 00:55:51 Ralph: a lot of industries have benefit of planned obsolescence 00:55:55 Good points jyasskin - and to put an explanation point on it: https://www.newsweek.com/bitcoin-mining-track-consume-worlds-energy-2020-744036 00:56:02 Ralph: thinks get thrown away and re-implemented after awhile 00:56:12 Ralph: On the Web we don't like to lose access to content that has been published 00:56:12 Turns out we haven't used all the world's electricity.... 00:56:28 Ralph: but I wonder, how do we avoid the problem of grandfathering all the resource-expensive stuff we've already done 00:56:35 Ralph: while we're evaluating the benefit of a new technology? 00:56:41