Proof-of-work should be banned • Hacker News Board

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#101

Post by mr_woozy » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:11 PM UTC

CyberRabbi wrote: post #72

mnd999 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a drop in the bucket. If bitcoin were a country it would be in the top 30 energy users worldwide. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56012952

It is a drop in the bucket. As expected the distribution of energy usage among distinct countries follows a power law distribution. Of the percentage of the highest consumer (China), it’s less than 1%. Comparing the usage to China makes sense because each country’s consumption of energy for the purposes of mining Bitcoin also follows a similar power law distribution. We find that the vast majority of Bitcoin mining h…

Well said. I may refer back to your excellent point when this argument comes up again......and again.........and again.

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#102

Post by aerojoe23 » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:12 PM UTC

alcio wrote: post #36

Proof-of-stake coins lack one of proof-of-work coins most important properties: censorship resistance. In both consensus systems, a censor is someone that has amassed 51% of the currently available stake (in PoW stake is mining machines, in PoS it is outstanding tokens). In proof-of-work systems, a censor can be unseated by censored parties allocating more capital to mining machines until non-censoring parties own 51…

The math in this article makes it sound trivial for any major government to destroy bitcoin. https://joekelly100.medium.com/how-to-kill-bitcoin-part-2-no... It points out that "But we can spend more on hardware then they could." is false. Once it was outlawed, they can just seize the mining hardware.

So PoS may actually be more resistant. Instead of acquiring physical hardware governments would have to start acquiring the currency. If they have to purchase it, it will drive the price up. While they maybe able to seize it in this scenario as well, it would seem the virtual crypto world would have better protection than the physical world.

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#103

Post by mr_woozy » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:20 PM UTC

>If we could push for legislation to ban PoW, then projects would take the time to switch to PoS, and everyone will go on like before. Still distributed. Still decentralized.

How would this even work, if in the same article you mention China mines 65% of the Bitcoin network (I don't believe this is true btw).

All you'll do is centralize the network to non-western democratic countries.

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#104

Post by mr_woozy » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

chrisjc wrote: post #31

Talking way outside of my understanding of POW, blockchain, etc, but what if POW was something with intrinsic value? Say for instance protein unfolding, physics number crunching, weather prediction, etc. And as a result this became the value of the ledger. Surely the amount of energy consumed by this valuable POW would make it potentially worth it when the returns would benefit society, the environment, etc...

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Help:FAQ#Why_don.27t_we_use_calcu...

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#105

Post by mr_woozy » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:41 PM UTC

jariel wrote: post #28

quotemstr wrote: post #7

Nobody has any right to tell me what kind of math I can on processors I own powered by electricity that I bought.

Yes, we do. We regulate all sorts of things, and this would be a smart thing to regulate. Electricity distribution and often production is partly to fully socialized almost everywhere, meaning 'it affects us all'. If you live on an island, disconnected from everyone else, then you can do whatever you want.

>If you live on an island, disconnected from everyone else, then you can do whatever you want.

I think you're unaware how isolated and segmented some of the global electrical grids are (even in well populated areas) that create the very off-peak idle production that allows mining to exist.

This is certainly the case in parts of China (rainy season hydro) and the US that must maintain capacity for instant peak usage but otherwise goes to waste.

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#106

Post by mr_woozy » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:42 PM UTC

brunoTbear wrote: post #14

quotemstr wrote: post #7

Nobody has any right to tell me what kind of math I can on processors I own powered by electricity that I bought.

This is tempting to think, but we already ban the math that provides, say, serving of child exploitation content.

and it's not working

https://www.bbc.com/news/education-53417284

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#107

Post by majewsky » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:52 PM UTC

fastball wrote: post #81

egypturnash wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heavens forbid that anyone who doesn't own cryptocurrency should have a studied opinion about it and its massive reliance on Proof-Of-Converting-Absurd-Amounts-Of-Power-Into-Waste-Heat. Heavens forbid that anyone who does own cryptocurrency and have concerns about said massive reliance on PoCAAoPIWH should put their money where their mouth is regarding those concerns. An absolute scandal.

Then put your name where your mouth is instead of hiding behind anonymity. Hardly a necessity in this case.

Just because I don't want to participate in your Ponzi scheme doesn't mean I cannot point out how idiotic it is.

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#108

Post by jariel » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 4:21 AM UTC

mr_woozy wrote: post #105

jariel wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we do. We regulate all sorts of things, and this would be a smart thing to regulate. Electricity distribution and often production is partly to fully socialized almost everywhere, meaning 'it affects us all'. If you live on an island, disconnected from everyone else, then you can do whatever you want.

>If you live on an island, disconnected from everyone else, then you can do whatever you want. I think you're unaware how isolated and segmented some of the global electrical grids are (even in well populated areas) that create the very off-peak idle production that allows mining to exist. This is certainly the case in parts of China (rainy season hydro) and the US that must maintain capacity for instant peak usage b…

My statement has nothing to do with electricity isolation.

It has to do with the fact that systems within a nation are integrated at an economic level, especially those that are socialized.

You can dig holes and fill them in your back yard to your heart's content, but you can't do something that impacts watersheds.

You can use electricity, but for certain uses it might be regulated, because in many instances the electricity production and distribution is socialized.

We invest billion in electricity generation to support industry and infrastructure, not to support wasteful speculation.

If someone wants to put up solar panels, or generate their electricity independently with no externalizations i.e. no pollution then go ahead. But otherwise, it's a giant waste.

People are literally paying slightly higher electricity bills to support speculation, not good.

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#109

Post by acco102 » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 8:24 AM UTC

"Nano is digital money for the modern world. Try out a fee-less, eco-friendly and instant currency that is easy to use, accept and integrate with."

"EOS is a cryptocurrency designed to support large-scale applications. There are no fees to send or receive EOS. Instead, the protocol rewards the entities that run the network periodically with new EOS, effectively substituting inflation for transaction fees." but EOS has inflation.

Re: Proof-of-work should be banned

#110

Post by fastball » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 5:10 PM UTC

majewsky wrote: post #107

fastball wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then put your name where your mouth is instead of hiding behind anonymity. Hardly a necessity in this case.

Just because I don't want to participate in your Ponzi scheme doesn't mean I cannot point out how idiotic it is.

My ponzi scheme?

Clearly this person does want to participate in the "ponzi scheme", they just want people to ignore the PoW schemes they're not holding a bag for and instead participate in the PoS schemes which they are.