Bitcoin miners’ access to our network must be restricted
Regarding “Research: Bitcoin May Be As Bad For The Planet As Beef,” (October 6): It is ridiculous that the processing and mining of crypto-coins should be allowed to pollute our environment the way it does. A cryptocurrency is just a transaction on a database, backed up financially by no one in case of loss, and ultimately represents nothing. The processing power required by the coin’s algorithms to securely place the transaction on their blockchain should not be able to access Texas’ power grid without a significant premium to pay for the development required to support the power-hungry game boards used to speed up computation. Blockchain technology (a decentralized, distributed public ledger) is a useful advance, but does not require these advanced calculations to be useful to a company.
These coins are actually only really useful to gullible and criminally inclined dark web users because the users believe that there is no government oversight. Of course, that’s not exactly true even today, and will be more the case as time goes on. Soon, hardware will also likely allow breaking the blockchain at will and stealing everything it represents. So much for coins not backed by government fiat.
Walt Lind, Nassau Bay
Abortion
Regarding “Opinion: Will we be as brave as Iranians in vote for women’s rights?” (October 7): Valerie Tyler is spreading the same lies that have been spewed by the mainstream media about abortion rights being taken away. All the Supreme Court did to overturn Roe was to send abortion policies back to each state under the 10th Amendment, where they should have been all along. Simply put, the 10th Amendment limits federal powers not specifically enumerated in the Constitution and delegates them to the state—in other words, the people.
We can all vote with our feet if we don’t like the state policies on abortion or other issues. Valerie has the right, as does every other woman in Texas, to move, but she, and no media outlet, should continue to push this message.
Barbara Goodson, Kingwood
Regarding “How Much Cruelty Is Bacon Worth?” (October 6): I just read Kathleen Parker’s article. Although I found it insightful and interesting to read, her comment about “do we require industry to adapt a means of production to reflect a moral people?” made me think again about abortion in our culture, if we are such “moral people”. I would like to see an article written by the same columnist where the subject was changed from bacon to babies. Would she have the same position for a baby, or perhaps even stronger, about this reflection of a moral people? Or would the pigs win in a comparison with our treatment of unwanted babies?
Earl Layton, Houston
Look in the mirror
Regarding “Opinion: Painting all Republicans as racist miss the mark,”(Oct. 5): So it appears that the more conservative readers of the Chronicle are offended by Mr. Pitts’ remarks despite the fact that he quoted the statistics verbatim. analysis by a highly respected partisan political think tank. The numbers are there for you to see plus a couple of anecdotes Mr. Pitts shared. The Republican Party “as a corporate body” (his words) does not mean that all Republicans are racists. This means that the leadership and the party platform include racist ideology. If you are uncomfortable with facts, maybe you should join the flat earth community.
Neal Massey, Houston
