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

SolarBatteryBitcoin

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 214 posts

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#21

Post by riffraff »

erentz wrote: post #17
barathr wrote: post #7

I'd like to believe that something like this is possible, but I just don't get how this gets around the fact that every Joule that is used for bitcoin mining is a Joule that wasn't used somewhere else. Even if many Joules of renewable power get wasted during periods of overproduction (mid-day in the summer in California), other more worthwhile loads could be shifted to use that power, because today it's negative-pric…

> that every Joule that is used for bitcoin mining is a Joule that wasn't used somewhere else. This applies to so many things. Snapchat data center? YouTube using gigawatts to process and stream cat videos? On and on. It’s really hard to control what people do with energy. Much better to focus on ensuring its priced correctly and all it’s externalities are properly included in that price. Then we don’t have to involv…

The problem with that is that you have to get the whole planet to agree, or you're just shifting the problem to a different country.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#22

Post by riffraff »

barathr wrote: post #7

I'd like to believe that something like this is possible, but I just don't get how this gets around the fact that every Joule that is used for bitcoin mining is a Joule that wasn't used somewhere else. Even if many Joules of renewable power get wasted during periods of overproduction (mid-day in the summer in California), other more worthwhile loads could be shifted to use that power, because today it's negative-pric…

I think a more important objection is that increased demand for solar panels and batteries for bitcoin mining pushes up prices for those (edit: if bitcoin prices are above market price for electricity).

It'd be "can't buu GPUs" all over again.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#23

Post by riffraff »

fny wrote: post #16

Can we please just invest more heavily in nuclear? My preference is thorium reactors given they are far, far less dangerous in all regards. Given ARKs time horizon, it would be a prescient investment. There's no way in hell were going to get stable power from solar and batteries alone. The bitcoin power problem is also solved.

I'm pro nuclear, but I'm afraid that ship has sailed. Renewable prices have been going down fast and are not stopping, and building a new plant is expensive.

We should care about keeping the old ones operating as long as possible, but we've been hearing tales of new safer smaller easy to deploy nuclear plants designs for decades, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#24

Post by wespiser_2018 »

jksmith wrote: post #19
gameswithgo wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

delusional, this just continues to waste resources for peoole to speculate. resources wasted, lives ruined when they get the gambling wrong. everybody cut this crap out, please.

Well there's nothing wrong with considering a store of value to keep you from being under the thumb of fiat. So there's works of art, maybe some other metals, some really unusual one-off earth property. So what you have left is crypto or gold. So invest in gold and encourage more gold mining. Or just trust your government and hold cash. Either way, you're losing a shitload of value. Hedge a small piece of your opinio…

How's is bitcoin even a hedge against the dollar when it's correlated with the U.S. stock market? So many things just don't add up, like is btc a currency or an investment? Fiat currency is really the only spendable currency.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#25

Post by yrral »

I had mentioned something like this on HN multiple times in the past but my thoughts never got much traction or upvotes:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26811819

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26094279

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25444985

(among others)

I'd like to solicit feedback on why this is, did I not explain some point clearly enough or is it just the legitimacy of it coming from ark vs a random commenter on HN?

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#26

Post by fy20 »

gruez wrote: post #11
barathr wrote: post #7

I'd like to believe that something like this is possible, but I just don't get how this gets around the fact that every Joule that is used for bitcoin mining is a Joule that wasn't used somewhere else. Even if many Joules of renewable power get wasted during periods of overproduction (mid-day in the summer in California), other more worthwhile loads could be shifted to use that power, because today it's negative-pric…

> Even if many Joules of renewable power get wasted during periods of overproduction (mid-day in the summer in California), other more worthwhile loads could be shifted to use that power, because today it's negative-priced during such periods. Clearly there aren't such worthwhile loads available, which is why the rates go negative in the first place. >pre-cooling of buildings during the summer (run the AC in houses f…

In terms of physics, no it doesn't make sense, it would consume less energy to turn it on when you get home (or set a timer for 30 mins before you get home). However electricity is usually the most expensive during the evening, and in places that have abundant solar, the cheapest during the day.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#27

Post by bArray »

yrral wrote: post #25

I had mentioned something like this on HN multiple times in the past but my thoughts never got much traction or upvotes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26811819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26094279 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25444985 (among others) I'd like to solicit feedback on why this is, did I not explain some point clearly enough or is it just the legitimacy of it coming from ark vs a r…

Probably because you posted a wall of text. Short and sweet comments are best, write a blog and link to it if you have lots to add :)

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#28

Post by _9omd »

zoshi wrote: post #15

The incessant snide comments expressing nothing but dislike for Bitcoin really don’t belong on HN. Not liking Bitcoin is fine, but if you don’t have anything to add just don’t comment. Every thread about Bitcoin on HN does not a dozen comments that it’s a waste of time and energy.

It's really pretty ridiculous and frustrating. I come here for intelligent discussion, and I agree it's okay if people don't like Bitcoin, but at least take some time to learn about it if you're going to argue. It's straight up denial at this point, because Bitcoin, Ethereum, and DeFi are securing and transacting billions of dollars every single day. It's not a question of if it works at this point, it does work! An decentralized overlay financial system has successfully been bootstrapped on top of legacy infrastructure. If you don't understand how big of a moment this is for humanity you must have your head in the sand.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#29

Post by christiansakai »

So the premise of the article is that the difficulty and inefficiency of Bitcoin is the fundamental feature that makes all this possible.

What are we waiting for then? Lets double the computation difficulty of Bitcoin's network. This will shoot up the price even further and will accelerate solar-battery-bitcoin-green combo. We just save the Earth and a lot of people become rich. Win win situation if you ask me.

/s

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#30

Post by AYBABTME »

yrral wrote: post #25

I had mentioned something like this on HN multiple times in the past but my thoughts never got much traction or upvotes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26811819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26094279 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25444985 (among others) I'd like to solicit feedback on why this is, did I not explain some point clearly enough or is it just the legitimacy of it coming from ark vs a r…

Wall of text with no catchy/eye-grabbing words section. Your idea is right.
Post reply on HN