Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index • Hacker News Board

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#301

Post by _Microft » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:05 AM UTC

mrb wrote: post #274

danmaz74 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the only way to have a decentralized, trustless, robust digital currency is to waste an inordinate amount of energy and increase our global warming and pollution problems, then we'll have to do without that kind of digital currency. It's a matter of priorities.

" inordinate amount of energy " It's comparable to what a single hydro dam like the Three Gorges Dam can produce. Don't fall prey to the scary comparisons BECI employs to mislead its readers. Global warming is critical, but there are other energy wasters much, much bigger than Bitcoin miners. Besides, as it's been said many times, miners tend to use renewables since they have become cheaper than fossil fuel power pla…

> It's comparable to what a single hydro dam like the Three Gorges Dam can produce.

Which happens to be one of, if not the largest hydroelectric dam in the world.

> Besides, as it's been said many times, miners tend to use renewables since they have become cheaper than fossil fuel power plants.

Which means that this renewable energy is no longer available for other uses.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#302

Post by trickstra » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:06 AM UTC

dx034 wrote: post #275

mrb wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's incredible that people on HN, a technical readership, still don't understand why the energetic or computational "waste" of proof-of-work is needed. There is simply no other known way of implementing a decentralized, censorship-resistant, robust digital currency. Without PoW you lose one of these properties. Proof-of-stake doesn't work. It isn't robust. Eg. PoS cryptocurrencies can't resolved which chain is corre…

Once we have enough green energy I'd totally agree with you. But currently, I don't think we can afford adding that much CO² for a currency that isn't widely used anywhere in the world.

https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miners-send-message-at-fide...

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#303

Post by nfin » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:21 AM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #229

gruez wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>trust-based models (like Stellar) What you're describing is basically Libra with slightly better entities backing it. Transactions can be reversed by those "trusted entities" with no recourse by you and at no cost to them. At least with PoW and PoS (to an extent), attempting to reverse transactions has a cost. Speaking of PoS, were the issues with PoS ever solved? Specifically the "nothing at stake" problem. The Wik…

I'd argue that people generally want systems where you can revert transactions that you made by mistake at almost no additional cost.

it is possible if you choose to use a third party.

The good thing is that you don't have too! You are not forced. If I send money to a friend or familiy, I don't need a third party.

A third party could be either a bigger financial company or just a trusted third party in a specific domain both people trust (and make a 2 out of 3 multi-sig with it, and if I get delivered what I want and the other side receives the payment, the payment processor has nothing to do, but could in case there is a dispute)

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#304

Post by zaarn » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:22 AM UTC

jimmydorry wrote: post #217

baroffoos wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bitcoin network has a limited number of transactions per second that it can process (Limited by block size). Last time I checked the network was basically at the limit so per transaction is not an insane way of looking at it. I get what you mean, if you decide not to make a transaction, the energy still gets spent but the more you use bitcoin the more valuable it becomes which incentivizes miners to keep mining.…

Not exactly. Second layer transactions sit on top, so the hard max of 4200 "settlements"[1] in a block does not necessarily mean 4200 transactions. With enough people using the second layer network, each "settlement" could mean finalising hundreds of transactions for thousands of people. This second layer network acts like a caching layer, and consolidates many transactions into a single transaction (put into very si…

Ah, so how many percent of the network are currently using this second layer? If it sounds so good, everyone must be using it already!

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#305

Post by toxik » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:25 AM UTC

danmaz74 wrote: post #265

mrb wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's incredible that people on HN, a technical readership, still don't understand why the energetic or computational "waste" of proof-of-work is needed. There is simply no other known way of implementing a decentralized, censorship-resistant, robust digital currency. Without PoW you lose one of these properties. Proof-of-stake doesn't work. It isn't robust. Eg. PoS cryptocurrencies can't resolved which chain is corre…

If the only way to have a decentralized, trustless, robust digital currency is to waste an inordinate amount of energy and increase our global warming and pollution problems, then we'll have to do without that kind of digital currency. It's a matter of priorities.

Said the man living one of the most privileged lives possible on this planet. Bitcoin has a very clear use to the oppressed people of the world, and for that exact reason it’s popular among criminals.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#306

Post by _Microft » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:26 AM UTC

mrb wrote: post #280

dx034 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once we have enough green energy I'd totally agree with you. But currently, I don't think we can afford adding that much CO² for a currency that isn't widely used anywhere in the world.

« isn't widely used anywhere » Bitcoin processes 10 million transactions a month (300k/day) and it's generally been growing over the years: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactions.ht...

Which is negligible compared to the number of credit card transactions in the US (> 300 times as many per month) or bank transfers in Germany alone (50 times as many per month). And that's not even counting other ways or countries.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#307

Post by sword_smith » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:26 AM UTC

spookthesunset wrote: post #112

sword_smith wrote: post #52

This does not seem to include transactions on the Bitcoin Lightning network which are transaction that are handled offchain so they are not included in blocks. I don't have the exact number of lightning transaction ocurring but it is the Bitcoin Core developers' plan that the scaling to thousand of transactions per second will and should take place on the lightning network (this is where they differ from their compet…

> Bitcoin is still a technology in its infancy ten years after being started. Meanwhile Apple introduced the first version of the iPhone, completely transforming the mobile landscape. Meanwhile, Uber and lyft upended the taxi market completely. Meanwhile, we have private companies sending payloads to the space station Meanwhile, electric cars are increasingly becoming mainstream. In what possible way can you claim bi…

The market cap of Bitcoin is above 120bn USD, less than Apple and Facebook but more than Netflix. But that is still only about 0.1 to 1 % of its potential. So, big but in its infancy.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#308

Post by jstanley » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:32 AM UTC

iikoolpp wrote: post #47

qwerty456127 wrote: post #29

If only governments and corporations did not insist on limiting people's freedom to trade freely and anonymously we wouldn't need that. Just make trading and privacy fundamental human rights like air breathing is and huge amount of energy will be saved.

Didn't realise cash was suddenly outlawed

Already, businesses in the UK that accept cash payments worth over €10,000 must register with HMRC as a "high-value dealer". In France, it is illegal to perform a cash transaction over €1,000 (yes, one thousand). And the same is true in Italy.

In the US, if the cops notice you have large amounts of cash in your car during a "routine traffic stop", they will take it from you on the basis that you must be a drug dealer.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#309

Post by hexo » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:36 AM UTC

I don't think this makes even sense to account. Try to look at internets energy consumption as a whole and how much of it "makes" sense and provides real value - tranferring memes, DDoSes, ADs and so. Look at all animated websites - how needed is this "feature", what value it provides (usability? haha) and how much total energy it consumes in sum across all devices. I really "love" that Belgium uses city night lights on their highways - this is total nonsense. Compared to these, Bitcoin energy consumption makes complete sense.

Re: Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index

#310

Post by jacobush » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 9:43 AM UTC

sword_smith wrote: post #307

spookthesunset wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bitcoin is still a technology in its infancy ten years after being started. Meanwhile Apple introduced the first version of the iPhone, completely transforming the mobile landscape. Meanwhile, Uber and lyft upended the taxi market completely. Meanwhile, we have private companies sending payloads to the space station Meanwhile, electric cars are increasingly becoming mainstream. In what possible way can you claim bi…

The market cap of Bitcoin is above 120bn USD, less than Apple and Facebook but more than Netflix. But that is still only about 0.1 to 1 % of its potential. So, big but in its infancy.

Besides it being completely different in other ways, the market cap is not value. You couldn't realize a tiny fraction of that without tanking the market cap.