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

121–130 of 214 posts

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#121

Post by MrMan »

nyolfen wrote: post #111
rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It is really useful to hoard! Not to ge rich, but to avoid getting poorer in countries with rampant inflation. >Also it facilitate money transfers a lot. You do realize that, because the total number of bitcoins is limited, it will get harder and harder to get bitcoins? So every generations will have to work/fight harder to get their currency, which is extremely unfair? Why would a newborn have more trouble to get h…

your comment only makes sense if it's interpreted as describing a world where bitcoin conquers the world and there is no other kind of money > Only because we _currently_ lack trust? If so, shouldn't we focus on that instead? my friend, if you can solve the problems of trust in human social systems, you will have solved a lot more than decentralized digital cash

We have of course not "solved" trust but our world functions only to the extent that we have and share trust. It is far more valuable than any other asset maybe

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#122

Post by lxgr »

erentz wrote: post #108
lxgr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's still not the problem: Proof-of-work mining wastes energy purposefully, while any other type of data processing only does so coincidentally. Data centers would jump at the opportunity of using 50% less electricity due to more efficient processors. Bitcoin miners would just mine twice as fast.

But that’s not what happens. Data centers have been getting bigger and bigger and bigger and now we literally talk about planning gigawatt scale data centers. No “data center” took the efficiencies of Moore’s law and said “we good, we can stop making more complicated uses of computers now and just run what we already have on more efficient hardware”. So then it comes down to, we’ll is that extra processing these data…

Very good point – arguably many companies also just have a constant budget for their computing expenses and will buy the biggest/most boxes they can get for it.

I still do think that it's an important difference whether becoming more resource efficient is something that could be incentivized/enforced without endangering the underlying business model or whether resource waste is the business model.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#123

Post by mekster »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #79

The premise is that there no more worthier causes than bitcoin beyond the grid needs. That premise is simply false. You can use excess grid capacity for lots of useful things including water desalination, charging cars at off peak hours, producing hydrogen. These are all applications that can flexibly use clean/cheap power when it is available instead of putting a constant load on the grid. This solution would compet…

Denying is easy but what other fair "waste" do you propose to keep a trustless decentralized system running?

Waste is how it's fair and how it negates cheating by letting people stick to its investments.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#124

Post by jkepler »

Hermio wrote: post #77
hparadiz wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The equilibrium is based on the hash rate difficulty which increases as more miners are added to the system. Miners can choose to jump into the system at any time with no restrictions. If a hash block is mined 'too fast' then the difficulty is increased proportionally. Of course as miners leave the network the difficulty also occasionally drops. The power needed to run these miners is entirely arbitrary. Just like ho…

You have not shown a real scenario how bitcoin could work without an energy armes race. The power consumption is NOT arbitrary: Everyone who owns bitcoins has to be motivated to keep bitcoin alive. More people having bitcoin means more people need to make sure that mining is happening. The second point is, bitcoin mining requires a certain amount of distribution to work as intended which leads to: you need a critical…

You stated, "We all LIKE that current system... "

Who is the "we all" you speak of? Its certainly not me (I've had far too many frustrating, expensive, time-consuming problems with the legacy banking/financial system), and I have lots of friends and acquaintances who are not at all content with the tyrannical "know your customer" regulations. Banks have been deputized to act as police, and at least in the EU, laws were passed protecting banks that legally allow banks to skim off their clients funds if the banks face serious crises (and that's even discounting what they steal from folks via designing for inflation)---thanks, but no thanks. That's legalized theft!

Beyond that, our mainstream debt-based monetary systems encourage and pressure everyone to spend more than they earn, funded by debt, chasing ever-cheaper consumer goods. This growth at all costs trashes the environment far more that a sound monetary system would.

So, perhaps the wider long-term effects of bitcoin existing as the worlds hardest money yet[0] would be production of higher quality long-term goods rather that cheap environmentally costly debt-funded junk. That possibility is independent of a bitcoin/solar/battery synergy such as suggested in the article's model.

I find the idea that sound money may result in more economically competitive renewable energy fascinating. I wonder if a similar model could apply to other intermittent renewable energy sources?

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#125

Post by Hermio »

SuoDuanDao wrote: post #104
Hermio wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see you stoped caring about real arguments because its to much effort for you to read through them and trying to argue against them. Sure, lucky enough, i'm arguing on hn also to make sure that comments and articles dont' scew the image of bitcoins being bad for the environment and happy enough, you stop arguing about it, does exactly this.

Your arguments also seem deliberately wordy and full of minor inaccuracies or things that look inaccurate but are simply your opinions; you give the impression of someone who crafts his arguments not to inform but to waste the time of people engaging him, then claims victory when they let him have the last word.

I brought arguments. It should be easy for you to take part in this discussion by using my arguments and showing they are wrong.

I have no clue why you would see my writing as 'deliberately wordy' if you could just counterargue them? I'm also not a native speaker, not sure if my style of writing is just different.

"who crafts his arguments not to inform but to waste the time of people engaging him" I'm lost. You make it really easy to do the same as the other commentor. You don't reference anything i wrote, you don't bring any examples or showing any issues in my argumentation.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#127

Post by MrMan »

hparadiz wrote: post #95
lanternfish wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a remarkable regressive perspective. Nothing is 'unblockable'. If global powers decided tomorrow that bitcoin was a blight on humanity, they could effectively wipe out the network in a variety of ways; it wouldn't take very much coordinated regulation to deflate the hype to a point where the utility of crypto basically tanks for the average user (who are mostly speculators at this point). Just because a syste…

> If none of this matters, why did you even bring it up? Because it's pretty funny everytime I come on here and people are bringing up lot's of weird theories, speculations, and just outright falsehoods but fail to acknowledge the elephant in the room: the pandora's box is open and that's that. You can try to make bitcoin illegal but you will find it's like making drugs illegal. All you will do is lose further contro…

If what you say is true then what is the logical outcome? As you become more economically powerful due to the price of bitcoing going up, but you need to defend ever larger investment in mining and power generation infrastructure, you will either need to capture government and become the government, or go to war with government, or mobs of starving people, or militias of other bitcoin cartels.

That means your best skillet is that of warlord / military strategist.

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#128

Post by dogman144 »

rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #105
speeder wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people need bitcoin. It is really useful to hoard! Not to ge rich, but to avoid getting poorer in countries with rampant inflation. Also it facilitate money transfers a lot. Yes, a transaction in bitcoin is expensive, but a international wire transfer on my country for example is EVEN MORE expensive, so transferring money using Bitcoin, even after eating all the fees, is cheaper (and easier too). So people t…

>It is really useful to hoard! Not to ge rich, but to avoid getting poorer in countries with rampant inflation. >Also it facilitate money transfers a lot. You do realize that, because the total number of bitcoins is limited, it will get harder and harder to get bitcoins? So every generations will have to work/fight harder to get their currency, which is extremely unfair? Why would a newborn have more trouble to get h…

Due to fractional nature of btc to ~8 decimal places, the math is that if everyone on the globe has it, they all have 0.03 btc and coffees will cost 0.000001 btc (so to speak). It’s unlikely that the whole globe all holds it. So this whole paragraph isn’t really an issue based on your unfair claim

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#129

Post by _Microft »

hparadiz wrote: post #54
lottin wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike Bitcoin, the Snapchat data centre isn't designed to waste as much electricity as fast as it possibly can. Bitcoin is designed to be wasteful, so don't be surprised if people takes issue with that.

Bitcoin isn't designed to waste energy. It's designed to auto regulate an increasingly more difficult mathamatical formula which is itself entirely separate from energy. It's humans that are essentially throwing electricity at it due to the high reward for doing so. Once equilibrium is reached there is no reason to throw more energy at it.

This sounds a lot like the „guns do not kill people, people kill people“ argument to me (which, for various reasons, is not a good one in my opinion)

Re: SolarBatteryBitcoin

#130

Post by randomhodler84 »

Hermio wrote: post #61
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…

What is our problem? The problem is creating/producing co2 is a problem for our planet. Can we agree on this? If we agree on the co2 production problem, lets take a look at what bitcoin is doing: It converts a lot of energy/resources of our planet into co2. It does that by the asic's someone has to create, and by far the direct energy consumption. What does bitcoin produce? It produces transaction security right? 1.…

I know you don’t believe it has any value; my belief is it is the most valuable thing on earth, more valuable than gold, platinum and love. I believe this as passionately as you are choosing to ignore it.

Your wall of text has many misconceptions and misunderstandings about how things actually work. I implore you to let your partially formed ideas go and read some more about what is really going on here.

Why do you think it is popular if it had no real value. Why is it the biggest meme of our lifetimes? Why will it be our money for the next 500 years?

Post reply on HN