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

Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

digiconomist.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 463 posts

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#161

Post by TylerE »

snagglegaggle wrote: post #157
TylerE wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're literally there to prevent money laundering and other financial crimes.

Those don't sound like theft. KYC is supposed to make it easier to trace money, ostensibly if used in crime. But doing this before any crime has occurred seems like a violation of the 4th amendment, and probably only passed constitutional muster at the time because the laws force a nongovernmental entity to infringe on your rights. The problem with KYC and banking laws are that you can prevent anyone from conducting…

There is no constitutional issue.

No one forces you to have a bank account, just like no one forces you to have a driver's license - which also involves giving up some rights, btw.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#162

Post by viraptor »

chroem- wrote: post #155
viraptor wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until most mining moves to renewables, yes it does.

It already is due to energy being the biggest mining expense. Miners congregate around inexpensive sources of hydroelectric/wind/solar energy.

Ok, I should be more clear. Until we have enough energy that we're all running on renewables and adding more bitcoin-related load uses up spare capacity rather than increase overall usage - it matters.

I mean, unless it's a dedicated power generating station, you're still using renewable power which is not used by someone else and overall we're supplementing that with coal and others.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#163

Post by snagglegaggle »

TylerE wrote: post #161
snagglegaggle wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those don't sound like theft. KYC is supposed to make it easier to trace money, ostensibly if used in crime. But doing this before any crime has occurred seems like a violation of the 4th amendment, and probably only passed constitutional muster at the time because the laws force a nongovernmental entity to infringe on your rights. The problem with KYC and banking laws are that you can prevent anyone from conducting…

There is no constitutional issue. No one forces you to have a bank account, just like no one forces you to have a driver's license - which also involves giving up some rights, btw.

Alright, that vein of arguments are the biggest cop-out ever. It's like trying to say the 4th amendment doesn't apply to houses because no one forces me to have a house.

The constitution recognizes the inherent right to be secure in your personage and effects. This should include your financial information.

I think it odd that people accept the abrogation of their rights w.r.t. driving. Yes, the government can definitely tax you for road use, but imagine having to carry an ID around that proved you paid your income tax, and that you were required to be IDable at almost all times to be sure you were not committing tax evasion.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#164

Post by mehrdadn »

donatj wrote: post #137
lukev wrote: post #132

The energy consumption of Bitcoin isn't new news. What continues to disappoint me, however, is how many people immediately jump to its defense with arguments based on the value it provides, as if that offset its cost. What gets neglected is that the Bitcoin algorithm is inherently wasteful . By its very design, it results in an insane amount of duplicated, pointless computation. The question isn't whether something l…

With energy becoming more and more renewable, does it really matter if BTC uses a lot of it?

Renewable energy isn't zero carbon. At the very least you gotta produce the energy generating system somehow. Then maintain it.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#165

Post by Iv »

lukev wrote: post #132

The energy consumption of Bitcoin isn't new news. What continues to disappoint me, however, is how many people immediately jump to its defense with arguments based on the value it provides, as if that offset its cost. What gets neglected is that the Bitcoin algorithm is inherently wasteful . By its very design, it results in an insane amount of duplicated, pointless computation. The question isn't whether something l…

I am really surprised that Bitcoin (or cryptocurrencies in general) hasn't solved its energy use yet and is still legal.

I thought the world would switch to proof-of-stake coins and gradually make bitcoins harder to use.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#166

Post by lacker »

lukev wrote: post #132

The energy consumption of Bitcoin isn't new news. What continues to disappoint me, however, is how many people immediately jump to its defense with arguments based on the value it provides, as if that offset its cost. What gets neglected is that the Bitcoin algorithm is inherently wasteful . By its very design, it results in an insane amount of duplicated, pointless computation. The question isn't whether something l…

I think we aren’t quite there yet with Ethereum and Stellar.

Proof of stake is promising, but it hasn’t rolled out yet. It’s possible that the migration leads to unforeseen problems, or fails entirely.

The trusted models like Stellar aren’t operating at the same financial scale as Bitcoin. The question there isn’t technically whether they can handle the transactions per second, but socially whether they are as resistant to censorship as Bitcoin is.

In the end, more people want Bitcoin than want Ethereum or Stellar. And people are willing to pay a lot of money to get it, money which in large part goes indirectly to miners’ energy expenditure. Perhaps, in the long run, the more efficient consensus mechanisms will prove superior to proof-of-work. But it hasn’t happened yet.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#167

Post by billions »

labster wrote: post #140
jron wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll shutdown my bitcoin mining operation if you shutdown your AC. I find 21c living to be incredibly wasteful and a luxury only offered to those blessed to be born in the first world. This type of argument goes nowhere fast.

Of course I can see. People’s sense of entitlement means we are all doomed. Mass extinction is always someone else’s fault, not my problem.

Please turn off your computer. You're wasting watts shaming first world folk. Go convince the 3rd world to stop burning trash and making babies. Oh, right - they'll stop by themselves when they reach your level of wealth.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#168

Post by aey »

spookthesunset wrote: post #120
aey wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the cost of 2 trillion a year. Or 1 trillion if if you only count service fees and not liquidity. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/financi...

Care to actually quote where the banks are spending $2 trillion a year to stop double spends?

The world is. There is no engineering reason why it’s so expensive to move numbers around in a bank.

In comparison the search engine market is 170 billion. If a google sized company or decentralized network could reduce the 2 trillion global spend on payments to 170b, that would be fantastic regardless of how much it spends on preventing double spends.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#169

Post by exit »

Iv wrote: post #165
lukev wrote: post #132

The energy consumption of Bitcoin isn't new news. What continues to disappoint me, however, is how many people immediately jump to its defense with arguments based on the value it provides, as if that offset its cost. What gets neglected is that the Bitcoin algorithm is inherently wasteful . By its very design, it results in an insane amount of duplicated, pointless computation. The question isn't whether something l…

I am really surprised that Bitcoin (or cryptocurrencies in general) hasn't solved its energy use yet and is still legal. I thought the world would switch to proof-of-stake coins and gradually make bitcoins harder to use.

> I thought the world would switch to proof-of-stake coins and gradually make bitcoins harder to use.

if proof of stake were implemented with the same security guarantees as proof of work, the bitcoin utxo set would be migrated over to it.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#170

Post by Geee »

jeremyw wrote: post #127

The contrarian take on Bitcoin and carbon is that Bitcoin chases the cheapest energy, and solar is quickly becoming the cheapest source. In some areas of the world it already is (various subsidized infra in China). See Ramez Naam (co-chair for energy and the environment at Singularity University) for more on this friendliness to proof-of-work. This is a good intro: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2019/09…

That's correct. Bitcoin actually accelerates the adoption of renewables because it provides an instant economic incentive to build e.g. solar in places where electricity demand doesn't provide high return on the investment.
Post reply on HN