131–140 of 209 posts
So now the developing world will start using their energy to mine BTC instead of manufacturing goods for us to consume. Will this ultimately cause inflation then? Because demand for goods will not be met? This crypto experiment keeps yielding more interesting results.
I believe there is more to the story and that doesn’t mean that there is no blackouts, but for completeness sake this video is incoherent with this thread’s headline. Blackouts may be caused by e.g. shitty, cheap, unmaintainable grid, or by local corruption that feeds from these farms and doesn’t officially demand higher loads from energy providers to cover the difference. My (completely subjective) opinion is that not taking it at the face value is a pretty safe move. (Disclosure: russian, non pro-crypto guy)
We should define something like a "Nakamoto scale" . A Nakamoto Type I civilization would be one that converts all available power of a planet into waste heat and funny numbers, a Nakamoto Type II civilization does that with all the power output of a star and so on... basically the Kardashev scale [0] but with the restriction that useful output SHOULD NOT be produced [1]. Edit: lowered requirement level from MUST NOT…
"overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out."
Eventually we will have calculated all the necessary derivations and the universe will come to an end.
It's more that...a system where you will pay anyone who finds any cheap power source anywhere in the internet-connected world no matter how they get it is obviously going to have awful externalities. Even though most people will be reasonably ok about it, enough people we be shitty enough to turn any worldwide no-checks system into a hellscape.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comparing life itself to crypto is ridiculous.
It's not, unless you think that e.g. cyanobacteria causing the Great Oxidation Event were somehow objectively more useful than cryptocurrencies. Mind you the Great Oxidation Event wiped good chunk of life back then. Mainly because oxygen was toxic to anaerobic life and it also oxidized methane making Earth into a snowball.
Idea to solve the crypto energy problem - sell space heaters as dual purpose crypto miners. People need space heaters. They buy them, but they also mine crypto (as a free byproduct of the space heating). The number of crypto mining space heaters out there dilute the value of dedicated mining so much that people don't bother with it anymore. Even buying the space heater to make money from mining crypto doesn't make th…
What do you do with them in the summer? What about warmer climates where you don't need a heater?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is basically what all life does. Thermodynamically, life can be described as an open system which makes use of gradients in its surroundings to create imperfect copies of itself. Crypto currencies still have a problem with creating copies of itself, but humans are happy to oblige.
Comparing life itself to crypto is ridiculous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ethereum also uses Proof Of Work mining....
Large scale ETH miner here who uses excess hydro. ETH uses PoW, but the long term plan for ETH is to move to PoS. I'm going to address one large difference between ETH PoW and Bitcoin PoW that people rarely talk about, which is the hardware differences. ETH did something relatively smart and tried to peg the hardware to GPUs. This had the effect of ensuring that there would not be the same speed race wars that (imho)…
On the other hand, most applications of ethereum don't need a blockchain or proof of work at all, since they are inherently vulnerable to attacks by centralized parties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comparing life itself to crypto is ridiculous.
It's not, unless you think that e.g. cyanobacteria causing the Great Oxidation Event were somehow objectively more useful than cryptocurrencies. Mind you the Great Oxidation Event wiped good chunk of life back then. Mainly because oxygen was toxic to anaerobic life and it also oxidized methane making Earth into a snowball.