Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
The Reality of NFTs (coming from a geography student)
Right, so we've all heard of the NFT situation. And we know that production of NFT's incur killing off rainforests and animals within and stuff like that. But there is so much more to it than just chopping down trees.
When our trees are chopped, not only are they not able to absorb CO2 anymore, but they also release all of their stored CO2 within, which can be millions of tonnes.
Our Earth as a whole has a maximum allowance of 2 degrees celsius surplus global temperature increase, because if we go above that we are basically ######### as humanity. We have ALREADY EXCEEDED ONE DEGREES CELSIUS SURPLUS. Along with the existing increase of Carbon dioxide and other warming gasses in the atmosphere, this has a lag time of 0.6 degrees celsius surplus, so whatever we keep producing will also have 0.6 added on afterwards. This only gives us a very tiny wiggle room of 0.4 degrees celsius surplus to sort out crap out.
And clearly companies like BHVR contribute to this issue, so in conclusion, screw them. If you support this heinous act all for a skin and voicelines then you need to evaluate your morals.
No ifs and buts.
Edit: some people ask how rainforests clearing correlate to NFT's. They don't directly, but to fund BHVR, their hqs, their resources etc. they all come from somewhere, and for what? to support some ######### pixels that dont even 'come' from a demonic entity? ######### that. Especially when parts of the crypto industry is focused on ######### like NFT's. The mining of it is harmful as it is
Comments
-
Don’t we pollute the environment just by driving cars as well? No outrage over that though, huh?
*Disclaimer: not a scientist, obviously*
5 -
Someone better translate this to Chinese.
5 -
theres no point using a "what about" argument because cars are fundamentally essential for most people. Youre comparing something thats practically necessary to something that has no necessity whatsoever
30 -
NFT's are pointless and motor vehicles are a necessity. Flawed comparison there chief.
23 -
I mean, nearly all electricity used to play games and power up EV batteries is sourced from oil and coal plants, so it's not like an extra few drops of oil in the ocean is going to sway us away from an impasse we are already in full motion towards ...
1 -
Humanity survived for thousands of years without any kind of gas-powered transportation.
2 -
where is the link between nft's and rainforest clearing exactly
my first positing would be that it's an unrelated issue given the power net supplying the dumb datacenters could be primarily nuclear if say in france and have little to no effect on the local or global environment
it's probably usually gas or coal though because people hate nuclear and thus their lungs, but even so, rainforests? are these nft centers cropping up in the desolated clearings of south america
0 -
i mean surely you mustve heard about global warming right... CO2 increases the global temperature?
1 -
Hasn’t that been happening since before NFTs? 🙂
4 -
First of all - that's worthless whataboutism.
Secondly, it is not optional to go from point A to point B. Vehicles are necessary - BHVR is not. Terrible comparison.
10 -
Hope all of you who are outraged over this are eating plant-based diets or you are hypocrites. Not eating animals or their secretions is the best thing an individual can do for the environment.
1 -
There are tons of things that aren’t necessary, yet we pollute the environment for it.
Not defending BHVR here, FYI.
1 -
Honestly couldn’t have said it better than this!
3 -
thats a whole seperate issue itself. there is so much unnecessary crap intergrated within our lifestyles that kill the environment but its now practically a necessity in order for different economies to move on (i.e. slaughtering animals, transporting the meat, processing it, packaging it etc.) THIS however is literally just pixel and has no usage whatsoever
1 -
This is such a stupid argument i can literally feel my IQ decreasing. Cars DO hurt the environment, there IS an outrage over it. Theres literally entire communities of people dedicated to hating on urban sprawl developments that require a car to get anywhere. Cars are awful for the environment and everybody knows it, but how about you try boycotting a car and see if you can get to work? They're a necessary evil until corporations at large downsize urban sprawl and allow for greener means of travel. Comparatively NFT's are completely useless and serve 0 purpose in comparison to things like cars, they are simply an environmentally destructive method of money laundering and nothing else. Meaning theres 0 repercussions to boycotting such an asinine form of product.
I get you aren't a scientist, but don't make stupid arguments on things you don't understand.
7 -
so because of NFTS we need to give the trees lightborn
0 -
A few more drops of oil in the ocean won't make much of a difference, so I guess it doesn't matter if we start dumping barrelfuls in daily?
NFTs exclusively use ethereum blockchain, the mining of a single ethereum transaction consumes enough energy to power the average home for several days.
So sure, it's just more energy usage, big whoop! The issue is you now consuming millions of times more energy to do something we can already do via legitimate avenues.
A bank transaction: totaly legit, legal, traceable, cheap.
NFT transaction: unregulated, untraceable, used for money laundering, costs over a million tines more energy than a bank transaction.
It's the difference between e-banking, or taking a cruise liner to Spain to deposit a check to make sure you don't get taxed.
It's totally irresponsible and only benefits the sickeningly rich.
7 -
I agree that it’s a stupid waste of resources. What I don’t agree with is singling this one out - unless you live a very environmentally conscious lifestyle, in which case you have a right to complain. However, I’m willing to bet most people here complaining don’t fit that description.
2 -
essentially LOL, but fr tho, its not even just rainforests and trees which are killed off. Crypto-mining is also included and the amount of CO2 produced is crippling. Better to just get rid of the 'flashlights'
4 -
I am currently in college with my major being Sustainability and Environmental Studies. Since 1990, our overall warming rate has almost doubled from what it was for the previous years we'd kept track. ( https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/ )
The Billions of hectares (1 hectare = roughly 2.4 acres) of forests that have been cut down in almost ALL countries is astronomical. This just speeds that up even more.
We are destroying our planet. And at this point, we're getting very close to a no-turning-back situation. If we continue the way we are, the estimate is that the earth will be uninhabitable by 2100.
3 -
Don't bother. They were the same way when I made a post asking if we can just have an answer about the NTF rumor before Bhvr announced it.
4 -
Thing is, there is no relevant measurement for a single transaction because the energy use is redundant for multiple transactions. To single out only a single transaction isn't true data and narrows the scope of evidence to a moot argument.
Tell me, how many transactions can be processed in a single day and measure that energy use against the average daily homeowner energy use, please.
0 -
Im currently doing A-Level Geography (pre uni school basically) and im so glad theres others like you out there doing the same. All these people are singling out these things to be so minute but in reality its deadly.
1 -
you are though. you're going "yeah but what about this" as a way to diminish and demean what others are concerned about. its an underhanded thing to do.
3 -
This is correct and incorrect at the same time.
Beef, specifically, is one of the worst offenders for the planet, thanks to all the cow farts. Chickens have far less of a carbon footprint as an example.
And then you're ignoring how CO2 emissions from things like equipment to do that farming as well. The only truly "sustainable" source of nutrients are sealife, provided we don't overfish them. And even then, that depends on the types of boats that are used to do said fishing, which in and of themselves can be pollutants.
2 -
im not gonna bother going down into the nitty gritty details. You are comparing something of company level that happens constantly DAILY to houseowner level...
1 -
While yes many countries including the US are planning on switching to electric cars
2 -
Get off your high horse buddy. I’m strictly talking about people here on this forum.
Just because I don’t always write out long paragraphs to express in detail what I think or feel doesn’t mean I don’t understand what I’m talking about.
So take a chill pill with the personal attacks, please. Thanks.
1 -
Thank you! Keep goin man - we're gonna need you in the future. I'm an old guy who's shifting my careers, so I'll be dead long before you. We need people like you just as much if not more than people like me! Get 'em sir! 👊
1 -
-20 Social Credit points. Do not question CCP environmental plan.
6 -
i mean... i get where youre coming from, but why even bother making such pointless comments in the first place... like most of us know what we are talking about, i dont understand why you have to probe further. its clearly bad, just call it out. there are some things which are a necessary evil
0 -
I like how you have to jump immediately from "either do things that destroy the environment or be completely 100% environmentally conscious" in order to make your (pointless? what even are you defending here?) argument, as if small changes don't make big impacts.
There are environmentally damaging things we can't yet unincorporate from our lifestyles. NFTs literally have absolutely no use. It's not that hard to see the difference, so my feeling is you're just being contrary for the sake of it.
Post edited by scenekiller on7 -
Thanks for the encouragement! Im planning to take Geography for University, i really hope i can pursue a career in sustainability of some form like carbon budgeting. We need all the help we can get!
2 -
Cars are utilities we use to get around our city, town, etc. NFTs are useless garbage that are making this situation unnecessarily worse.
3 -
I already agreed that NFTs are a waste of resources. The only thing I’m calling out is that a lot of people complain about things they don’t truly believe in (like being environmentally friendly).
0 -
most emission issues with cattle comes out the front end, not the back end
just a random aside, what powers the grid that charges the cars at night when solar isn't an option and wind dies down
aha, imagine if nuclear wasn't sabotaged~
0 -
I guess I just need to write out an essay next time I want to point something out, otherwise people will just assume what I’m thinking…
0 -
Your literally wasting your time with those people.
2 -
unfortunately that is the case, it takes a lot more to put down your thoughts rather than stating vague unclear comments
1 -
Yeah but let's be honest, burps aren't as funny as farts XD But you're absolutely correct, both the farming it takes to feed the cows, plus the various ######### (no pun intended) in their stomachs contributes more than the flatulence.
Also, I am a raging liberal, but I agree with you - nuclear is one of the cleanest, massive sources of energy, that would solve MUCH of our issues.
And lastly, you're leaving out hydro power, which is fast coming up as another energy source. They've now made water turbines that are small enough to be put beside a river and can power multiple (not a lot, mind you) houses. The technology is growing leaps and bounds.
0 -
I’ll be more conscious of that next time. Appreciate you keeping your responses civil.
1 -
Another nuclear advocate! <3
0 -
I think everyone has the right to complain when a person/organization is destroying OUR planet for no reason.
Its OUR world. WE have every right to try and protect it.
4 -
This is like saying you can't complain about carcinogenic substances in your food unless you're actively trying to cure cancer.
Crypto and NFTs are substantially more wasteful than any legitimate alternative. It's absolutely a move backwards, and is basically pissing all over other peoples attempts to reduce energy consumption.
It's not even maintaining the status quo, it's like going out and intentionally destroying a part of nature just for some quick cash.
In fact that's exactly what it is, as bitcoin/ether mining is essentially a race to see who can crack the code first. It's essentially "who can burn down the most trees gets a shiny coin!" and then we wonder where all the trees are going.
4 -
Most of the plants we grow are fed directly to the animals that we eat. If we ate plants directly, we would be able to grow fewer plants, leading to less C02 from farm equipment.
The ethics of eating fish aside, there is no way of fishing sustainably with how high the demand for fish is.
Plant-based diets are by far the most sustainable diet.
3 -
hydro is quite respectable but mainline-tier stations tend to be an ungodly undertaking (even compared to nuclear) and is super location-dependant, can pretty much slap reactors wherever (though if recent events are any indication, on tsunami-prone coasts that are also rather geologically active can have some undesirable effects), that and a lot of the big water reserves keep drying up, the massive dams are quite a wonder though, smaller is interesting nonetheless, something similar occurring with mini fission reactors
the french may have had a lot of terrible ideas but nationalizing their nuclear industry was definitely not one of them
viva la atome
4 -
Direct equivalencies can be spurious to an extent, but...
Farming digital assets is incredibly power hungry and probably one of the most wasteful processes when you consider what its used for. NFT's are basically built on this infrastructure making them completely useless pieces of virtual bling for people who have more money than braincells, and no qualms about burning a carbon footprint the size of a small country to have it.
Unfortunately nuclear isn't much better of an option because the biggest pollutant from nuclear power plants is actually hot water. Hot water contributes to eutrophication of lakes, rivers and ground water which not only has all kinds of ecological effects but is a great releaser of Methane when allowed to make hypoxic thermoclines in large bodies of water, which it readily has.
Sure a one for one comparison between nuke and coal is gonna make coal look really bad but its kind of like comparing acute injury to chronic injury. Breaking your arm is bad and has long term effects which are immediately apparent and impactful, but the slow chronic long term build of of repetitive stress in your arm from constant pressure can be just as devastating if not worse in the long term. That's kind of the nuke vs coal comparison.
So the idea that nuke has little or no effect on the surrounding environment is largely untrue. Especially when you consider in this case its being used to generate digital currency at an alarmingly poor energy to output ratio.
I'll say this, that there is often a hyper focus on old growth forest when it comes to conservation. While its very important as ecosystem the focus on its preservation often overshadows other vital ecosystems that are just as important and often more threatened, mainly being wetlands, grasslands, estuarine and pelagic environments. That often have higher biomass and carbon potential, not to mention the importance of fresh water on the whole, than a lot of old growth.
My point is the "save the rainforest" rhetoric is a common conservationist trope that's often not that helpful. It does at least bring up the point that the un-necessary waste from digital farming is a big drain on energy which is a big impact on environment and it doesn't really matter where the data mining center is built it still contributes.
4 -
fission ain't a wonder solution to power, maybe fusion could be that if it went the distance to viability
but there's just no way it isn't the best mainline load option available regardless of its quite significant downsides, the most pertinent being radiant scorched earth if the right few people get complacent at the wrong time
even if one creates a magic energy cube that can store solar/wind so that their load can take over the mainline, the resource extraction and manufacturing involved in them, particularly the newest omega turbines is quite.. substantial, to say the least
but storage is hell and for most locations that just leaves coal and gas to contend with uranium/thorium, and one is massively cheaper
0 -
Your initial argument was made in bad faith.
The only assumption I'm making is that you're smart enough to know why cars are an entirely different situation than NFTs, yet you decided to pick the "but what about THIS????" hill to die on for some reason.
4 -
Playing games is not a necessity. Posting on a forum is not a necessity. You do it tho and don't seem to be mad about it.
NFTs are bad, but the people screaming bloody murder at BHVR are equally guilty of polluting the planet and no one bats an eye.
0
