191–200 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And who is gonna foot the bill for the mining?
You already pay to heat your house, what if you could be paid to hear your house?
Running an ASIC 24/7 would use up like $285 worth of electricity per month if you pay 12 cents for each kilowatt-hour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Off chain through Liquid or Lighting networks.
The funny thing is that there is 117x more Bitcoin on Layer 2 ETH in WBTC[1] than in the lighting network[2]. $5,793,513,475.00 // WBTC (Bitcoin on Ethereum) $49,173,964.59 // Lightning [1] - https://wbtc.network/dashboard/order-book [2] - https://1ml.com/statistics
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It won't and even BTC enthusiasts have given up on that. They narrative is now that BTC is a "store of value".
For many BTC enthusiasts the store of value narrative has been in place for a very long time. “I see Bitcoin as ultimately becoming a reserve currency for banks, playing much the same role as gold did in the early days of banking. Banks could issue digital cash with greater anonymity and lighter weight, more efficient transactions.” - Hal Finney (2010)
Why would (a) my bank want to do this, and (b) why would I want my bank to do this?
From what I understand bitcoin currently has a $20+ transaction fee with a transaction time takes 60 minutes+ With these issues in addition to the high power consumption, how will Bitcoin become a usable currency?
It won't and even BTC enthusiasts have given up on that. They narrative is now that BTC is a "store of value".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Electricity is one of the most inefficient ways to heat a dwelling. I think natural gas is still considered to be several times more efficient but I haven’t looked at it in a few years. Of course if you are also getting benefits from the crypto you mined that will offset the cost.
>Electricity is one of the most inefficient ways to heat a dwelling. This is not true. Resistive heating is inefficient indeed but not all forms of conversion of electricity are inefficient. Geothermal pumps are very efficient for instance and use electricity only, they can be assisted directly by solar (PV) too.
Doesn't mean that the generator on the other end is efficient but that is a separate concern that can benefit from economies of scale (a big gas turbine would be more efficient than a swarm of small gas ovens producing the same energy).
From what I understand bitcoin currently has a $20+ transaction fee with a transaction time takes 60 minutes+ With these issues in addition to the high power consumption, how will Bitcoin become a usable currency?
Wake up, this question was reasonable in 2010, maybe 2015. :) Today no serious person is still thinking it would be usable :)
Question that came to mind after reading the headline: could this become a future reason for governments to criminalise the trading / use of Bitcoin because of negative environmental effects? On the surface it seems the value of Bitcoin is directly tied to its energy consumption and thus environmental harm. I get that Bitcoin itself is decentralised and cannot be banned outright. But could it be neutered in such a wa…
Will anyone criminalise the US army because they use lots of energy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_usage_of_the_United_Sta... The answer: they might try, but good luck with that.
Ah yes, the old trope that people use the US dollar because they are forced to.
Meanwhile, back in reality, people around the world are desperate to get their hands on USD for commerce, because it's easily transacted, accepted and valued anywhere. You know, kinda like Bitcoin purports to be, but way more common.
From what I understand bitcoin currently has a $20+ transaction fee with a transaction time takes 60 minutes+ With these issues in addition to the high power consumption, how will Bitcoin become a usable currency?
It won't and even BTC enthusiasts have given up on that. They narrative is now that BTC is a "store of value".