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

Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

blog.ethereum.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#181

Post by DennisP »

agumonkey wrote: post #135
kemonocode wrote: post #43

For the people who criticize as to why they've taken so long in shifting to a PoS model: consensus takes time, so does developing and testing something that definitively shouldn't go wrong. Also, there's the inherent issue with Proof-of-Stake that Proof-of-Work doesn't have: the initial distribution of the coin has to be wide enough before it could feasibly self-maintain a PoS shift without being immediately vulnerab…

I wonder if it's already on on a testnet

The PoS protocol itself has been running in production since December 1, in parallel with the old network, with over $10 billion staked so far.

What remains is to change the legacy clients to use the PoS network for choosing blocks, instead of miners. That has a working multi-client testnet.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#183

Post by r32rf43g »

rfd4sgmk8u wrote: post #91

ETH wont, and shouldn't migrate to PoS. PoS is a scam -- a trick, a reinvention of existing corrupt economic models. It throws out the greatest part of decentralized cryptocurrencies -- trustless, independently verifiable, auto-adjusting to external conditions, hard to fake proof of work. It replaces it with shell games and chicanery. I am very pro proof of work. The energy usage is a good thing. We can deal with the…

What are your thoughts on PoET systems?

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#184

Post by Der_Einzige »

DCKing wrote: post #133

Good. Very good. This may be a radical take, but I think nations should introduce some unprecedented legislation: ban trade of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies. Don't ban their trade because they make poor financial products, either because of rampant fraud or criminal activity. That's a different argument and requires different approaches. Ban their trade because global society shouldn't accept rampant incentives to l…

Forget just the environmental issues. The price of commodity hardware for AI research is astronomical right now (try getting into deep learning right now, I dare you!). Crypto is directly trading off with AI research and game development.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#185

Post by mminer237 »

rfd4sgmk8u wrote: post #130
surmoi wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes ETH gas price (transaction fee) have been very high, much higher than BTC lately... Not all cryptocurrency have such insane transaction fees though. NANO is a good example of a fee-less cryptocurrency (cf. https://nano.org/ )

All the Nano was invented 100% the day it was made. So its really just a shell game to pass on the worthless day 0 tokens for more than 0 after day 0 -- just like every other PoS coin ever. Contrast with PoW, where coins cost REAL money every block to produce. It costs very little to transfer something of little value.

Costing money to produce doesn't make something inherently valuable. It would be expensive to sell iPhones crushed by previously-undriven Lamborghinis, but the product would still be worthless. Neither NANO nor Bitcoin have any inherent value. It's entirely derived from other people willing to pay for it. If people want to use a cryptocurrency, using something that doesn't require 15 GW to power could quite rationally be more valued more highly.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#186

Post by noja »

Aqua wrote: post #159
DCKing wrote: post #133

Good. Very good. This may be a radical take, but I think nations should introduce some unprecedented legislation: ban trade of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies. Don't ban their trade because they make poor financial products, either because of rampant fraud or criminal activity. That's a different argument and requires different approaches. Ban their trade because global society shouldn't accept rampant incentives to l…

I cringe every time I see such comments. Ban bitcoin or ban beef because it uses too much energy. Humanity will continue to require energy as it advances and banning anything "because it uses too much energy" is a ridiculous advice. How about we ban gold mining, or set quotas on the number of children people may have, that will surely contribute to our CO2 reduction goals. It's also Orwellian and reminiscent of how t…

Wow. Where to start on this one!

Where do you see the problem in using less energy for a crypto currency? Why not make a cryptocurrency that uses even more energy?

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#187

Post by colincooke »

Honestly this change might actually be the one that makes me finally buy some crypto. The energy burden and overall wastefullness of these coins has vastly outweighed any potential benefit they may provide. A big coin making such a good (at least in my books) change should be rewarded. Since crypto for better or worse seems here to stay, I hope that energy concious decisions continue to be made, and that the market responds positively.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#188

Post by pavlov »

chrischattin wrote: post #175
dboat wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many industries do a lot of harm to the environment for profits. On the spectrum of those, where do cryptos fall? I don't know and personally hold only a little bit, nothing I would be very pained to lose, but it would certainly cause a lot of economic harm to a lot of people to do what you propose. The idea cannot be taken seriously without first answering my question.

Youtube alone uses 2x the amout of energy as the entire Bitcoin network, for perspective.

That's just not true.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#189

Post by fvdessen »

DCKing wrote: post #133

Good. Very good. This may be a radical take, but I think nations should introduce some unprecedented legislation: ban trade of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies. Don't ban their trade because they make poor financial products, either because of rampant fraud or criminal activity. That's a different argument and requires different approaches. Ban their trade because global society shouldn't accept rampant incentives to l…

PoS is not just a more environmentally version of PoW. It is a lot more vulnerable to state level actors. If the state takes over / subverts / influences the limited number of stakeholders, then it is game over.

With PoW the state can influence the existing miners, but cannot prevent new independent miners to pop up and counter act.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#190

Post by TarasBob »

focom wrote: post #2

So with PoS, we recreate a system where a few rich pool have decision over the network. Can someone enlighten me on how this is different from the current fiat system?

Read the pros and cons of proof of stake compared to proof of work here (written by Vitalik): https://vitalik.ca/general/2020/11/06/pos2020.html
Post reply on HN