Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 309 posts

Re: BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

#21

Post by wyldfire »

mej10 wrote: post #15
wyldfire wrote: post #6

> A bitcoin transaction wastes ^H^H^H^H^H^Hcosts -- FTFY. It's not a waste if you actually got something for it. e.g. your chemical ICE in your car produces heat that is useful in cold weather. Not waste heat if it has utility. Electric cars have to spend electrical energy to generate the same heat. That said, the fact that this keeps coming up would indicate that there's definitely a marketplace for a coin that cost…

Personally, I think it would be morally reprehensible to use energy to keep BTC alive if there are vastly more efficient alternatives that achieve the same goal. Though I am interested in counter-arguments.

I don't think "reprehensible" applies here. We keep running old computers and old cars and we replace them as the old ones wear out. Bitcoin's ubiquity will be hard to unseat but all you can do is try to convince individual wallet-holders and merchants to use [the new more efficient coin].

Other coins have been proposed that either reduce the amount of computation (PPC) or increase the utility of the calculations (XPM). Note that those have existed for a long time and don't require an ICO. Using storage space as a (hopefully?) less energy-intensive contest to replace PoW is interesting although I suspect that Chia isn't truly novel here either.

Re: BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

#22

Post by Squithrilve »

kiddico wrote: post #2

One of the only things I dislike about bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is the flagrant use of power that doesn't necessarily compute anything. With the proof of chia being used in storage, does that imply a lower power cost? I'm not sure what proof of time is either... Does anyone know more about this and can clarify things?

> flagrant use of power that doesn't necessarily compute anything.

I don't get it. Why won't you complain about monitor pixels, that don't display content using/wasting power or various unused/reserved bits transmitted every second (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abhi-covert-00) that also waste power. Proof of work uses energy to meet some strict guarantees.

This reminds me of complaining that SSL is computationally expensive and therefore plain HTTP is better. 10 years ago of course.

Re: BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

#23

Post by mrguyorama »

wyldfire wrote: post #17
wbkang wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste: use or expend carelessly, extravagantly , or to no purpose.

IMO it's none of those, and I think I'm being honest and fair here -- not just a bitcoin fanboy. What's the baseline for a corresponding transaction? Maybe that's a credit card which will cost (not waste here either) 1-2% of the purchase price. But even that's not quite fair because the merchant is taking some risk on this purchase that usually amounts to some additional cost. Also credit cards can't be used to secur…

Bitcoin doesn't replace credit card transactions or system. You have to judge it by it's actual value, not what it pretends to want to be

Re: BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

#25

Post by wyldfire »

mrguyorama wrote: post #23
wyldfire wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO it's none of those, and I think I'm being honest and fair here -- not just a bitcoin fanboy. What's the baseline for a corresponding transaction? Maybe that's a credit card which will cost (not waste here either) 1-2% of the purchase price. But even that's not quite fair because the merchant is taking some risk on this purchase that usually amounts to some additional cost. Also credit cards can't be used to secur…

Bitcoin doesn't replace credit card transactions or system. You have to judge it by it's actual value, not what it pretends to want to be

Yes, fair enough -- it is truly unique and difficult to compare w/credit cards.

But to further the debate, how would you evaluate it in these terms ("waste"/"extravagance")? Would you stipulate that it has value or that it at least has utility? What sort of analogy or baseline would you compare it to, so that we could evaluate how efficient or wasteful it is?

Re: BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

#27

Post by solotronics »

wbkang wrote: post #8
wyldfire wrote: post #6

> A bitcoin transaction wastes ^H^H^H^H^H^Hcosts -- FTFY. It's not a waste if you actually got something for it. e.g. your chemical ICE in your car produces heat that is useful in cold weather. Not waste heat if it has utility. Electric cars have to spend electrical energy to generate the same heat. That said, the fact that this keeps coming up would indicate that there's definitely a marketplace for a coin that cost…

Waste: use or expend carelessly, extravagantly , or to no purpose.

see the interesting part here is that if you can come up with a less wasteful way to mine BTC anyone is welcome to do that. You would become rich beyond your dreams for this.

Re: BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

#28

Post by 1053r »

bglusman wrote: post #18
jparse wrote: post #9

I don't see how this is better. It sounds like we have to waste power running hard drives now. Isn't Ethereum's Proof of Stake better?

I thought so too until I read this http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/#is-a-work-indep... and, maybe there's counter arguments? But it seemed like a pretty good argument to me.

Your linked argument is poorly formed. It's true that any system which periodically emits value will cause people to work towards achieving that value. However, it's not true that the work in question will necessarily be wasted in an arms race.

Specifically, a (well constructed) Proof of Stake system will cause people to work to get a piece of the value by having them purchase the coin used for staking. This will cause the value of the coin on the open market to rise, which will increase the equilibrium market cap of the coin in relation to the world.

Because "money is a veil" [1], this won't create or destroy any actual goods or services. It will just transfer value from some persons to other persons. Therefore, Proof of Stake is more efficient than Proof of Work, because it moves cryptocurrency from negative-sum (electricity wasted) to something that's approximately zero-sum.

Another way of saying this is that you can't PRODUCE value by creating any currency with zero intrinsic value. However, you can WASTE value in this activity, and Bitcoin, as currently constructed (along with all possible Proof of Work systems) is wasteful. Proof of Stake wastes less value than Proof of Work.

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_money

Re: BitTorrent inventor announces eco-friendly Bitcoin competitor Chia

#30

Post by lilyball »

Squithrilve wrote: post #22
kiddico wrote: post #2

One of the only things I dislike about bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is the flagrant use of power that doesn't necessarily compute anything. With the proof of chia being used in storage, does that imply a lower power cost? I'm not sure what proof of time is either... Does anyone know more about this and can clarify things?

> flagrant use of power that doesn't necessarily compute anything. I don't get it. Why won't you complain about monitor pixels, that don't display content using/wasting power or various unused/reserved bits transmitted every second ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abhi-covert-00 ) that also waste power. Proof of work uses energy to meet some strict guarantees. This reminds me of complaining that SSL is computation…

If bitcoin's power usage is like a massive drain in the middle of the ocean sucking down millions of gallons of water per second, your comment is like complaining about the drip on your kitchen faucet.
Post reply on HN