the fiction of data

It isn’t the risky financial implausibility of bitcoin or other digital assets that concern me — it is the longterm impact to our planet.

Photo by NASA on Unsplash

Bitcoin alone is estimated to consume 127 terawatt-hours (TWh) a year — more than many countries, including Norway. In the United States, cryptocurrency activity is estimated to emit from 25 to 50 million tons of CO₂ each year, on par with the annual emissions from diesel fuel used by US railroads.— Samuel Huestis, RMI

Thankfully there is at least one section of Executive Order 14067, Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets (Sec 2. (f) that appears to be aware.

(f) We must support technological advances that promote responsible development and use of digital assets. The technological architecture of different digital assets has substantial implications for privacy, national security, the operational security and resilience of financial systems, climate change, the ability to exercise human rights, and other national goals. The United States has an interest in ensuring that digital asset technologies and the digital payments ecosystem are developed, designed, and implemented in a responsible manner that includes privacy and security in their architecture, integrates features and controls that defend against illicit exploitation, and reduces negative climate impacts and environmental pollution, as may result from some cryptocurrency mining.

Most of us are shaky when faced with long-term consequences of our short-term behaviors. I’ll go first. I can’t seem to get worked up over rinsing out yogurt containers before recycling. On the other hand, I do fly way less frequently.

We zoom in and out in our daily lives both personally and professionally and try to make the best of what we can by balancing our own rivalrous dynamics. Like many of you I am not impressed with ChatGPT as an alternative to my own ideas or creative thinking. But it is seamless for finding potential datasets quickly or cleaning up problematic code.

Data scientists have to be able to hold tension. It is impossible for us to be unbiased. We are human and every decision we make regardless of intent is tinged with bias. The data we select, the data we don’t select — the technology we support and the technology that renders skepticism and an arched eyebrow.

The tension is not the “baby” or the “bathwater” it is the story. Perhaps we don’t need to keep both indefinitely but to not investigate the bigger picture may be to our detriment.

Looking at the picture below, and only the picture below, what do we see? In the absence of a frame of reference, perhaps you discern broad paint strokes. There are a few different hues and perception of depth. I can almost make out a two dimensionality to the painting. But that’s about it.

If we zoom out — beyond our own narrow penumbra and observe from a distance, we now see the reality.