Destrucción digital: Examinando las tensiones sociológicas que obstaculizan la regulación de bitcoin
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/rec.9.33170Palabras clave:
Bitcoin, Estudios de Ciencia y Tecnología, Teoría del Actor-Red, Marcos tecnológicosResumen
Bitcoin es un desastre ecológico. En 2017, la red Bitcoin consumía la misma cantidad de energía al año que Uruguay, cuando se estimaba que su número total de usuarios en todo el mundo era de 3,4 millones (Hileman y Rauchs, 2017: 99). En 2021 esta cifra había aumentado a 101 millones, y las estimaciones indicaban que la energía necesaria para alimentar la red Bitcoin equivalía a la requerida por todos los demás centros de datos del mundo juntos (Blandin et al, 2020; de Vries, 2021). Además, la creciente huella de carbono de Bitcoin muestra pocos signos de disminuir a pesar de las importantes medidas para limitar su uso (de Vries et al, 2022). En el contexto de una crisis energética mundial y de una emergencia climática más amplia, los reguladores, desde Pekín a Nueva York, están considerando cada vez más medidas que restrinjan el uso de los equipos de alto consumo energético necesarios para alimentar las redes de criptomonedas. Este artículo pretende contribuir a los estudios de Criminología Verde e informar sobre los esfuerzos reguladores (1) esbozando la compensación realizada en el proceso de diseño de las criptomonedas que se encuentra en la raíz del problema; (2) haciendo hincapié en la urgencia de esta cuestión a través de una amplia revisión de los estudios existentes; y (3) recurriendo al enfoque constructivista en los estudios de ciencia y tecnología para destacar y examinar las tensiones sociológicas que pueden obstaculizar los esfuerzos reguladores. En resumen, es evidente que existen vías sostenibles para el desarrollo de las criptomonedas, pero plantean importantes desafíos a lo que muchos en la industria de las criptomonedas consideran la razón de ser de Bitcoin en particular.
Citas
Antonopoulos, Andreas M. 2014. Mastering Bitcoin: Unlocking Digital Cryptocurrencies. Boston: O’Reilly Media.
Back, A. (2002) HashCash – A Denial-of-Service Counter-Measure. Available at http://www.hashcash.org/papers/hashcash.pdf
Barthe, Y., Meyer, M., & Sundqvist, G. (2022). Technical Problematisation: A Democratic Way to Deal with Contested Projects? Science, Technology and Society, 27(1), 7-22.
Becker, J., Breuker, D., Heide, T., Holler, J., Rauer, H. P., & Böhme, R. (2013). Can we afford integrity by proof-of-work? Scenarios inspired by the Bitcoin currency. The economics of information security and privacy, 135-156.
Bedford, L., Mann, M., Foth, M., & Walters, R. (2022). A post-capitalocentric critique of digital technology and environmental harm: New directions at the intersection of digital and green criminology. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 11(1), 167-181.
Bevand, M. (2017). Electricity consumption of Bitcoin: A market-based and technical analysis. mrb’s blog. https://blog.zorinaq.com/bitcoin-electricity-consumption/
Bijker, W. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs. 1st ed. Cambridge (Massachusetts): MIT Press.
Blandin, A., Pieters, G. C., Wu, Y., Dek, A., Eisermann, T., Njoki, D., & Taylor, S. (2020). 3rd global cryptoasset benchmarking study. Available at SSRN 3700822.
Brekke, J. K. (2021) Hacker-engineers and Their Economies: The Political Economy of Decentralised Networks and ‘Cryptoeconomics’, New Political Economy, 26:4, 646-659, DOI: 10.1080/13563467.2020.1806223
Brunton, F. (2019). Digital cash. Princeton University Press.
Bruun, M. H., Andersen, A. O., & Mannov, A. (2020). Infrastructures of trust and distrust: The politics and ethics of emerging cryptographic technologies. Anthropology Today, 36(2), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12562
Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., & Barthe, Y. (2009). Acting in an uncertain world: An essay on technical democracy. The MIT Press.
Castor, A. (2023). Ethereum moved to proof of stake. why can’t bitcoin? MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/02/28/1069190/ethereum-moved-to-proof-of-stake-why-cant-bitcoin/
De Best, R. (2024a) Bitcoin dominance 2024, Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1269302/crypto-market-share/ (Accessed: 20 March 2024).
De Best, R. (2024b). Bitcoin transactions per day 2009-2024. Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/730806/daily-number-of-bitcoin-transactions/ (Accessed: 20 March 2024).
De Vries, A. (2018). Bitcoin's growing energy problem. Joule, 2(5), 801-805.
De Vries, A. (2019). Renewable energy will not solve bitcoin’s sustainability problem. Joule, 3(4), 893-898.
De Vries, A. (2020). Bitcoin’s energy consumption is underestimated: A market dynamics approach. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, 101721. Doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2020.101721
De Vries, A. (2021). Bitcoin may consume as much energy as all data centers globally. Digiconomist. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-may-consume-as-much-energy-as-all-data-centers-globally
De Vries, A. (2024). Bitcoin’s growing water footprint. Cell Reports Sustainability, 1(1).
De Vries, A., & Stoll, C. (2021) Bitcoin's growing e-waste problem. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. Volume 175, December 2021, 105901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105901
De Vries, A., Gallersdörfer, U., Klaaßen, L., & Stoll, C. (2022). Revisiting Bitcoin’s carbon footprint. Joule, 6(3), 498-502.
Dodd, N. (2018). The Social Life of Bitcoin. Theory, Culture & Society, 35(3), 35-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276417746464
DuPont, Q. (2014). The politics of cryptography: Bitcoin and the ordering machines. Journal of Peer Production, 1(4), 1-10.
DuPont, Q. (2019). Cryptocurrencies and blockchains. Polity Press: Cambridge
ElBahrawy, A., Alessandretti, L., Rusnac, L. et al. (2020) Collective dynamics of dark web marketplaces. Sci Rep 10, 18827. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74416-y
Feenberg, A. (1995) Alternative Modernity. London: University of California Press
Feenberg, A. (1999) Questioning Technology. London: Routledge
Feenberg, A., (2017). Technosystem: The Social Life of Reason. Harvard University Press
Foley, S., Karlsen, J. R., Putniņš, T. J. (2019) ‘Sex, Drugs, and Bitcoin: How Much Illegal Activity Is Financed through Cryptocurrencies?’, The Review of Financial Studies, Volume 32, Issue 5, May 2019, Pages 1798–1853, https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhz015
Frank, N. K., & Lynch, M. J. (1992). Corporate crime, corporate violence: A primer. New York: Harrow and Heston.
Gerard, D. (2017). Attack of the 50 foot blockchain: Bitcoin, blockchain, Ethereum & smart contracts. David Gerard.
Golumbia, D. “Politics of Bitcoin: Software as Right-wing Extremism.” University of Minnesota Press. (2016)
Golumbia, D., (2015). ‘Bitcoin as Politics: Distributed Right-Wing Extremism.’ Geert Lovink, Nathaniel Tkacz, and Patricia de Vries (eds), MoneyLab Reader: An Intervention in Digital Economy, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, ISBN: 978-90-822345-5-8. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2589890 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2589890.
Goodkind, A. L., Jones, B. A., & Berrens, R. P. (2020). Cryptodamages: Monetary value estimates of the air pollution and human health impacts of cryptocurrency mining. Energy Research & Social Science, 59, 101281.
Hess, D. J. (2007) Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry. London: MIT Press
Hileman, G. and Rauchs, M., (2017). Global cryptocurrency benchmarking study. Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance.
Howson, P., & de Vries, A. (2022). Preying on the poor? Opportunities and challenges for tackling the social and environmental threats of cryptocurrencies for vulnerable and low-income communities. Energy research & social science, 84, 102394.
John, A., Lang, H., & Singh, M. (2024) Bitcoin market cap crosses $1 trillion as buyers flood in, Reuters. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/technology/total-amount-invested-bitcoin-back-over-1-trillion-2024-02-14/ (Accessed: 20 March 2024).
Karlstrøm, H. (2014) Do libertarians dream of electric coins? The material embeddedness of Bitcoin, Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, 15:1, 23-36, DOI: 10.1080/1600910X.2013.870083
Koroleva, P. (2022). Digital Environmental Sustainability | Office of the secretary-general’s Envoy on Technology. United Nations. https://www.un.org/techenvoy/content/digital-environmental-sustainability
Krause, M.J., Tolaymat, T. (2018) Quantification of energy and carbon costs for mining cryptocurrencies. Nat Sustain 1, 711–718. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0152-7
Latour (1999) ‘A Collective of Humans and Nonhumans” in Kaplan (2004) Readings in the Philosophy of Technology – Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield
Latour, B. (1992) ‘Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts’. In Bijker, W and Law, J. eds., Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1992), pp. 225–258.
Latour, B. (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford University Press
Lichti, C., & Tumasjan, A. (2023). " My Precious!”: A Values-Affordances Perspective on the Adoption of Bitcoin. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 24(3), 629-663.
Lynch, M. J., Long, M. A., Stretesky, P. B., & Barrett, K. L. (2017). Green criminology: Crime, justice, and the environment. Univ of California Press.
MacKenzie, D. (2019). Pick a nonce and try a hash. London Review of Books, 41(8), 35-38.
Masanet, E., Shehabi, A., Lei, N. et al. (2019) Implausible projections overestimate near-term Bitcoin CO2 emissions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 9, 653–654. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0535-4
Mills, T. (2018). What has become of critique? Reassembling sociology after Latour. The British journal of sociology, 69(2), 286-305.
Nakamoto, S. (2008) Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System Available at: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Parkin, J. (2020). Money code space: Hidden power in Bitcoin, blockchain, and decentralisation. Oxford University Press.
Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social studies of science, 14(3), 399-441.
Rauchs, M., & Hileman, G. (2017). Global cryptocurrency benchmarking study. Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
Rauchs, M., Blandin, A., Klein, K., Pieters, G. C., Recanatini, M., & Zhang, B. Z. (2018). 2nd global cryptoasset benchmarking study. Available at SSRN 3306125.
Redshaw, T. (2017). Bitcoin beyond ambivalence: Popular rationalization and Feenberg’s technical politics. Thesis Eleven, 138(1), 46-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0725513616689390
Reynolds, S. (2023) Bitcoin’s hashrate war between Antpool and Foundry intensifies as BTC ETF nears, CoinDesk Latest Headlines RSS. Available at: https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/11/24/antminer-foundry-battle-in-hashrate-war-as-bitcoin-etf-nears/ (Accessed: 19 March 2024).
Roubini, N. (2018). Blockchain’s broken promises. Project Syndicate, 26.
Sadowski, J., & Beegle, K. (2023). Expansive and extractive networks of Web3. Big Data & Society, 10(1), 20539517231159629.
Scott, B. (2014). Visions of a techno-leviathan: The politics of the Bitcoin blockchain. E. https://www.e-ir.info/2014/06/01/visions-of-a-techno-leviathan-the-politics-of-the-bitcoin-blockchain/
Song, Jimmy. 2019. Programming Bitcoin: Learn How to Program Bitcoin from Scratch. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
South, N., & Beirne, P. (1998). Editors’ Introduction. Theoretical Criminology, 2(2), 147-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480698002002001
Stoll, C., Klaaßen, L., & Gallersdörfer, U. (2019). The carbon footprint of bitcoin. Joule, 3(7), 1647-1661.
Swartz, L. (2018). What was Bitcoin, what will it be? The techno-economic imaginaries of a new money technology. Cultural Studies, 32(4), 623-650.
Trozze, A., Kamps, J., Akartuna, E.A. et al. (2022) Cryptocurrencies and future financial crime. Crime Sci 11, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-021-00163-8
Turner, F. (2010). From counterculture to cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the rise of digital utopianism. University of Chicago Press.
Venkataramakrishnan, S. and Wigglesworth, R., (2021). Inside the cult of crypto. [online] Ft.com. Available at: <https://www.ft.com/content/9e787670-6aa7-4479-934f-f4a9fedf4829> [Accessed 22 February 2022].
Vranken, H. (2017). Sustainability of bitcoin and blockchains. Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 28, 1-9
Ward, S. V. (2023, January 26). Why I think bitcoin could be a key to saving the environment. CityAM. https://www.cityam.com/why-i-think-bitcoin-could-be-a-key-to-saving-the-environment/
White R (2017) Technology, environmental harm and green criminology. In McGuire MR and Holt TR (eds) The Routledge handbook of technology, crime and justice: 241-259. London: Routledge.
Winner, L. (1997). Cyberlibertarian myths and the prospects for community. ACM Sigcas Computers and Society, 27(3), 14-19.
Ylönen, M., Raudla, R., & Babic, M. (2024) From tax havens to cryptocurrencies: secrecy-seeking capital in the global economy, Review of International Political Economy, 31:2, 563-588, DOI: 10.1080/09692290.2023.2232392
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
