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

Sabotaging Bitcoin

blog.dshr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 224 posts

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#71

Post by cheschire »

krupan wrote: post #67
cheschire wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP was arguing against GGP’s point and I was simply pointing out that the argument was hollow. What are you referring to with “research more”?

Hmm, maybe I wasn't following the thread very well? Many people like to discredit Bitcoin by saying it's only worth is what people decide it is. If that's not what you were trying to do then I apologize.

I don’t discredit any crypto based solely on its ability or inability to fulfill debts, public and private.

But I do wonder if the abstract nature of it will forever hinder its ability to do so universally.

I’m also interested why Bitcoin Cash wasn’t more successful after the fork.

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#72

Post by kfrzcode »

ShowalkKama wrote: post #40
kfrzcode wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile, Hedera remains carbon negative and 7 orders of magnitude more efficient than Bitcoin. "Today, Hedera is performing the equivalent of over 10,000,000 transactions and 788,000 transactions for the same amount of energy it takes Bitcoin and Ethereum to process 1, respectively." [0]: https://hedera.com/blog/going-carbon-negative-at-hedera-hash... [1]: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10160701/

I find extremely funny that I came across this spammy comment while sitting on a vulnerability in their code because my attempts of contacting them have been unsuccessful

Here you go! https://hedera.com/bug-bounty/

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#73

Post by TylerE »

jfengel wrote: post #59
TylerE wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False. Gold and silver have intrinsic value beyond their use as currency.

True, but only a minuscule fraction of it is used for that purpose. If that were the sole source of its value, it would be worth pennies per once.

That is obviously false on it's face.

If it were only worth pennies an ounce, numerous industries wouldn't be paying what they do for it. The fact that many industries value it at several thousand dollars an ounce is self-evident from their continued use of it.

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#74

Post by UltraSane »

beenBoutIT wrote: post #63
spir wrote: post #35

This is good analysis. The main longitudinal aspect omitted is that the profitability of the attack goes up as long as the price of BTC doesn't double or more each halving. In ~6 more years, Bitcoin will undergo two more halvings, so if the price of BTC is not ~400k by then, then attack will have become more feasible.

In the near future every nation state will be vying for the largest stake of the BTC mining pie and the BTC race will be bigger than the Space Race and the Nuclear Arms Race combined and adjusted for inflation.

Why? BTC is not just worthless, it has negative value due to how much electricity it takes to securely mine new blocks.

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#75

Post by UltraSane »

Bitcoin is the least efficient technology ever created. There is no limit to how much electricity it can consume just to handle 7 transactions per second. No matter HOW much electricity it uses this value will never increase.

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#76

Post by UltraSane »

fragmede wrote: post #22
Zaskoda wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What this site does not show is how much of the power used to maintain the network is waste power such as gas that's normally burned off at the well site or hydro electric that goes to waste. Unlike AI, there's a strong incentive to find the cheapest electricity possible. Because that's what everyone else is doing. With Bitcoin, you now exactly what your costs are and what your yields are. There's a clear threshold,…

> gas that's normally burned off at the well site Funny thing about that. Civilized governments put a stop to that, by fining flare-offs to make it economical to not do that.

flare-offs are much better than releasing raw methane into the atmosphere because methane is a much worse greenhouse gas than CO2

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#77

Post by UltraSane »

beenBoutIT wrote: post #55
cyberax wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What this site does not show is how much of the power used to maintain the network is waste power such as gas that's normally burned off at the well site or hydro electric that goes to waste. WTF? Hydro is rarely wasted because it's so dispatchable. Typically, it can only happen during high water seasons. Same for the gas power plants. > Unlike AI, there's a strong incentive to find the cheapest electricity possibl…

An interesting point is that any nation state or corporation can focus resources on either AI or BTC, but not both at the same time. BTC is a sure bet in the long run while AI is potentially capable of delivering a faster ROI with no hard guarantees. As BTC FOMO hits every country on Earth it's likely that AI will take a 100+ year backseat to massive state sponsored BTC operations. It's not hard to imagine a situatio…

"BTC is a sure bet in the long run "

7 transactions per second is NOT a sure bet.

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#78

Post by patrickthebold »

TylerE wrote: post #73
jfengel wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but only a minuscule fraction of it is used for that purpose. If that were the sole source of its value, it would be worth pennies per once.

That is obviously false on it's face. If it were only worth pennies an ounce, numerous industries wouldn't be paying what they do for it. The fact that many industries value it at several thousand dollars an ounce is self-evident from their continued use of it.

This is interesting to think about: For gold I'd say the demand is coming from both industries and from people who want it as a store of value. If it was only used as an industrial chemical, then surely the price would drop because there would be less demand.

Some bitcoin advocates will talk about how useful it is as a currency, and I wonder how much bitcoin is actually used for purposes other then to hope you can sell it to someone else for more than you paid.

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#79

Post by yownie »

cheschire wrote: post #71
krupan wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, maybe I wasn't following the thread very well? Many people like to discredit Bitcoin by saying it's only worth is what people decide it is. If that's not what you were trying to do then I apologize.

I don’t discredit any crypto based solely on its ability or inability to fulfill debts, public and private. But I do wonder if the abstract nature of it will forever hinder its ability to do so universally. I’m also interested why Bitcoin Cash wasn’t more successful after the fork.

>I’m also interested why Bitcoin Cash wasn’t more successful after the fork.

you mean besides it being run by a bunch of crooks and scam artists like CSW?

Re: Sabotaging Bitcoin

#80

Post by hackernudes »

beenBoutIT wrote: post #60
Stevvo wrote: post #20

Before the AI bubble, Bitmain was only worth ~$1 billion. Now they are worth ~15, because they make chips for AI also. Either way, you could buy bitmain for the budget mentioned in the attack if it were for sale. Or bitmain could pull off the attack, if indeed they do "control ... all the major mining pools" as the article alleges. But who ultimately controls Bitmain? The Chinese state. So, by extension, bitcoin is c…

Like it or not in the end it will just be BTC. China will stop exporting Bitcoin mining tech. Nation States will dump money into proprietary BTC mining tech and keep it to themselves just like military tech. The US needs to see this reality and focus on domestic BTC mining tech like the future depends on it.

It comes down to semiconductor manufacturing, not ASIC design. Taiwan, Korea, USA are still on top.
Post reply on HN