[deleted]
Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
41–50 of 151 posts
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#42Am I correct to assume that this is Bargaining stage of grief?
It's a piece about the energy usage of cryptocurrencies, possible solutions as well as potential problems with those solutions. What does the bargaining stage of grief have to do with it?
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#43It is useful if you consider having a non-governmental/internet native currency a useful thing.
If you don't see any value in that, it's gonna be hard to justify that computation.
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I prefer to spend resources on something of debatable value (look for aliens), rather than on something that it is indisputably of no value to humanity (proof of tedious work).
Why not something of more concretely useful value, like protein folding or climate simulations?
Literally anything except what we are doing today
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
For about the zillionth time, space heating with Bitcoin mining is about one-quarter as energy-efficient as using an actual heat pump and so the “we can heat buildings with it!” argument does not actually excuse the massive energy use at all.
So.. somehow the heat output of a mining computer just disappears? Oh wait that's nonsense, because your CPU is literally a heat pump.
A heat pump moves heat around, using energy – the opposite of a Sterling engine.
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
For about the zillionth time, space heating with Bitcoin mining is about one-quarter as energy-efficient as using an actual heat pump and so the “we can heat buildings with it!” argument does not actually excuse the massive energy use at all.
So.. somehow the heat output of a mining computer just disappears? Oh wait that's nonsense, because your CPU is literally a heat pump.
The metric being discussed relates to how much thermal energy you get for a given electrical input.
If you put 1000W into a Bitcoin miner, computer, resistive space heater, etc, you get 1000W thermal out.
If you use that 1000W to turn the compressor in a heat pump, you get far more heat out (3-4x is a reasonable average in a lot of areas), because you're not simply generating heat from the energy - you're using the energy to move heat. A heat pump is an air conditioner in reverse - you cool the outside air and heat the inside air.
A standard CPU dissipates heat as a resistive heater would - you pump 100W into the CPU, you get 100W of heat out. I'm not sure what you're using to claim that a CPU "is literally a heat pump" here - it's not, by any standard definition of a heat pump.
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
For about the zillionth time, space heating with Bitcoin mining is about one-quarter as energy-efficient as using an actual heat pump and so the “we can heat buildings with it!” argument does not actually excuse the massive energy use at all.
So.. somehow the heat output of a mining computer just disappears? Oh wait that's nonsense, because your CPU is literally a heat pump.
A "heat pump" in this context is a device that uses a refrigeration cycle to extract heat from outside and move it inside. An A/C running in reverse, essentially.
And heat pumps are vastly more efficient than resistive heating (or using the heat from a microchip).
In many places, for every 1W of power a heat pump consumes, it can move 4W or more of heat into the space.
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#48Bitcoin is an extremely inefficient computing platform. There's no silver lining to BTC, it's simply a moderately big, potentially huge mistake in the history of modern technology.
Inefficient compared with what? Gold requires a ton more energy. As does the existing banking system. Bitcoin uses less electricity than Christmas lights and provides a completely electric, transparent, uncensorable currency.
> Bitcoin uses less electricity than Christmas lights
You could power Christmas lights for several Christmas if not a lifetime with the electricity used in a BTC transaction. Let that sink in.
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#49If it's useful, it's less costly. If it's less costly, it is less secure.
Costly doesn't mean that it has to waste actual resources. The chance of winning a block could be made to be proportional to the amount of bitcoin deposited into some smart contract, instead of proportional to the amount of electricity wasted. The outcome would be exactly the same, and nothing would be wasted.
Re: Why Can't Computing at the Heart of Bitcoin Be More Useful?
#50FWIW there's a lot of half baked arguments going around the space, so a few comments for anyone genuinely interested in evaluating facts:
- The usage of electricity in Bitcoin is a feature not a bug. It's designed to use the most democratic and ubiquitous commodity avalible. Any nation/individual can evaluate their electrical opportunity cost and at any point make the decision to dedicate resources to towards re-balancing the network without permission. This is not possible with proof of stake.
- We produce about 160,000 TWh of power, ~50,000 TWh is wasted due to inefficiencies. Bitcoin using 120 TWh (0.25% of wasted power)
- A lot of Power projects get scraped due to inconsistencies in demand. Random Ex: Texas power outages during summer peak AC usage. It's infeasible to spin up and spin down extra generators to meet spikes in demand. #Bitcoin fixes this by providing excess supply a discounted demand during normal hours that can be routed away during peak needs else where. Ditto for renewables.
- Bonus: SHA-256 did not get broken this week.