https://bitinfocharts.com/bitc...
https://bitinfocharts.com/bitc...
https://bitinfocharts.com/bitc...
https://bitinfocharts.com/bitc...
https://bitinfocharts.com/bitc...

In reverse chronological order: The first three are random addresses, and in each step part of the total gets sent elsewhere (which I didn't trace) or added to (again, I didn't trace). The last two, however, are known addresses: Xapo.com-2 and Bitstamp-coldwallet. The earliest transaction in that sequence was from Bitstamp to Xapo on 14 Oct. 2019.

They are open-sourcing their development "stuff", and are doing so because it will help them keep the "critical mass" of developers writing stuff for their platforms. As long as software keeps being released for Windows (all flavors) or Azure, they are pretty much guaranteed a place in the market.

It's really smart positioning on their part, and really shows that someone in upper management is thinking 20+ years in advance...

It's because he wasted his public trust by not practicing what he preached and therefore made himself out to be a hypocrite... If he really wanted people to follow him, he'd live in a modest home that has been (recently) energy audited and upgraded, then buy carbon credits for the energy he uses (like the rest of us). Then he'd take the savings (vs. the mansions he bought) and put that toward actually addressing the problem at hand.

Notice, BTW, I'm not saying he's wrong in the message he preaches (cutting GHG emissions is almost certainly a good thing, even if he is wrong), just that he needs to leave the preaching to the people that haven't squandered the public trust...

"Climate Change" is not some major conspiracy; But there are plenty of unscrupulous people who are trying to profit from it. This is the nature of people. Sorry, nothing to see here, move along...

That said, the only way to truly get people "on board" with reducing carbon emissons is to make it less expensive than the alternative. Otherwise, you have the (huge) uphill battle of making them believe it is their natural "God-given" right to be carbon-neutral. Good luck with that...

The answer is, and has always been, better technology. Do more with less energy, generate more energy with less fuel, "make" more fuel with less "fossil"... You get the picture.

The only catch is, "Who is going to pay for the R&D?" I would argue most people would be quite OK with the government providing grants & subsidies to research centers dedicated to doing just that. "Oh, you're using my tax dollars to help reduce my cost of living? Carry on!"