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

Coinbase outages

coinbase.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 310 posts

Re: Coinbase outages

#301

Post by vorpalhex »

jk7tarYZAQNpTQa wrote: post #269
vorpalhex wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect Satoshi lacks the intent to be a villian here. The creator of the Keurig, a device which produces amazing amounts of waste, talked about the unintended consequences of his invention and how ashamed he is for the damage his invention has done. https://time.com/3731356/keurig-coffee-k-cup/

> unintended consequences I'm sorry but you have to be very short sighted to call single dose coffee in non-recyclable capsules "unintended" waste.

He meant for the machines to be used in situations where one-off servings are common, like small offices or for people who rarely have more than a cup.

Though making them unrecyclable is a bit of a question. Obviously it wasn't the intent but it seems a very obvious overlook. I believe (but may be wrong) that the Nespresso, a competitor, has compostable pods.

Re: Coinbase outages

#302

Post by bb88 »

keymone wrote: post #290
bb88 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Energy used for PoW per transaction is a dumb metric. Cars monitor energy use through MPG. Datacenters monitor it as well. Why should crypto currencies get a pass? > Satoshi actually made the most efficient decentralized money that can ever exist and prevented more externalities in the world than potentially any human ever will. [CITATION NEEDED]

> Cars monitor energy use through MPG. Datacenters monitor it as well. Why should crypto currencies get a pass? cars spend energy to move. datacenters spend energy to compute things. bitcoin mining doesn't spend energy to process achieve some TPS, it spends energy to achieve certain level of security, so it's security per energy spent that matters, not energy per transaction. if transactions or number of them are not…

> if miner will spand the same energy whether it's for 1 or 1 trillion transactions -- then energy per transaction metric is zero signal.

So? A running car consumes gas even when it's idle. My parents used to measure MPG at every tank refill, which was a combination of miles, idle, braking, etc.

We can certainly take an average of transactions to get a reasonable number for watts/transaction.

> no, actually, it's an opinion.

... which was stated as fact.

Re: Coinbase outages

#303

Post by keymone »

bb88 wrote: post #302
keymone wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cars monitor energy use through MPG. Datacenters monitor it as well. Why should crypto currencies get a pass? cars spend energy to move. datacenters spend energy to compute things. bitcoin mining doesn't spend energy to process achieve some TPS, it spends energy to achieve certain level of security, so it's security per energy spent that matters, not energy per transaction. if transactions or number of them are not…

> if miner will spand the same energy whether it's for 1 or 1 trillion transactions -- then energy per transaction metric is zero signal. So? A running car consumes gas even when it's idle. My parents used to measure MPG at every tank refill, which was a combination of miles, idle, braking, etc. We can certainly take an average of transactions to get a reasonable number for watts/transaction. > no, actually, it's an…

> A running car consumes gas even when it's idle.

Bad extrapolation of analogy, but still - how convenient that you decided to focus on the lower bound. How about the high bound? Can a car go trillions of miles per gallon? Because Bitcoin block can contain trillions of transactions every 10 minutes.

> We can certainly take an average of transactions to get a reasonable number for watts/transaction.

You can, it’s just not useful.

Re: Coinbase outages

#304

Post by eloisius »

3327 wrote: post #195
eloisius wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are they liquidating their positions to if they are shutting off access to exchanges? Every seller needs a buyer.

Crypto isn’t governed by finra regulations. Its wild west, therefore wildwest tactics like front running etc are fair game. Gg for those of you who maxed out credit cards to buy crypto

I have no doubts about front-running, but that would still mean they need suckers that have access to exchanges in order to liquidate their positions.

Re: Coinbase outages

#305

Post by bb88 »

keymone wrote: post #303
bb88 wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if miner will spand the same energy whether it's for 1 or 1 trillion transactions -- then energy per transaction metric is zero signal. So? A running car consumes gas even when it's idle. My parents used to measure MPG at every tank refill, which was a combination of miles, idle, braking, etc. We can certainly take an average of transactions to get a reasonable number for watts/transaction. > no, actually, it's an…

> A running car consumes gas even when it's idle. Bad extrapolation of analogy, but still - how convenient that you decided to focus on the lower bound. How about the high bound? Can a car go trillions of miles per gallon? Because Bitcoin block can contain trillions of transactions every 10 minutes. > We can certainly take an average of transactions to get a reasonable number for watts/transaction. You can, it’s just…

> You can, it’s just not useful.

Yes, yes it is. Stating an opinion as if it's fact, again?

Re: Coinbase outages

#306

Post by piva00 »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #216
piva00 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the network already saturated with transactions though? To the point where it was needed to implement something like Lightning Network to compensate for that?

It was never needed. What was needed was to increase the max block size. Instead, new people took it over and kept the throughput to the rate of a 56k modem. Now for the cost of a single transaction you can pay for enough hard drive space to hold the entire chain and enough bandwidth for a billion transactions. This is like building a sidewalk instead of a freeway then saying you need to build a network of gondolas o…

Ah, yes, I'm very aware of that fact, my use of "needed" here was in the sense it was needed after all the ones making money from transaction fees took over and decided to not increase the block size.

Re: Coinbase outages

#307

Post by Spooky23 »

m3kw9 wrote: post #200
screye wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, dumping once you already knee deep in the dump only ensures a guaranteed loss. If you are confident about the long term prospects of an investment, then holding on for longer might just work. I won't be selling any of my Eth or PoS crypto currencies any time soon. It helps that crypto makes up less than 15% of my portfolio.

Not really, you can dump and buy lower. Dump and not buy back will guarantee losses. Usually you dump based on panic and not buy back that’s how wealth is lost usually. Most assets don’t go to zero after someone sells, they may go lower but will have a bounce point somewhere down the line.

It does, but that’s a tax event.

Re: Coinbase outages

#308

Post by hanniabu »

bgroat wrote: post #234
dougmwne wrote: post #103

I was shocked the other day on the Ethereum PoS announcement by the energy consumption per transaction metrics. It threw the whole crypto market into a new light for me. BTC is using over a megawatt hour PER transaction! That's almost 5000 miles in a Tesla model 3. BTC is using about 2/3 of the power of every data center on the planet! Many, many people have been imprisoned or executed for creating less societal harm…

Proof of Work eliminates the need for a centralized authority by identifying the planet all financial intermediaries live on and destroying it

PoS achieves the same

Re: Coinbase outages

#309

Post by ric2b »

lottin wrote: post #297
ric2b wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you measure a car's efficiency based on how much wiper fluid it uses per mile? The two measures aren't meaningfully linked, so it makes little sense to compute a correlation.

No, because wiper fluid contributes nothing to the outcome, which is the car moving from point a to b. The car will move from point a to point b whether it has wiper fluid or not. But it will not move without fuel.

Ok, so what about how many rotations the radiator fan does per mile?

The car will overheat and won't reach point B if the fan isn't running, so does it make sense to compare the efficiency of different cars based on how many rpm's their radiator fans do?

Re: Coinbase outages

#310

Post by lottin »

ric2b wrote: post #309
lottin wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because wiper fluid contributes nothing to the outcome, which is the car moving from point a to b. The car will move from point a to point b whether it has wiper fluid or not. But it will not move without fuel.

Ok, so what about how many rotations the radiator fan does per mile? The car will overheat and won't reach point B if the fan isn't running, so does it make sense to compare the efficiency of different cars based on how many rpm's their radiator fans do?

No, because the general idea behind efficiency has to do with the costs that are incurred to achieve a particular outcome. For example, a method is said to be more efficient than another if it achieves the same outcome at a lower cost. The outcome in the case of cars is movement because that's the purpose they're built for, so a measure of car efficiency has to reflect how costly is to move the car some unit of distance. The RPMs the radiators fans do per mile don't tell us anything about how costly it is to move the car, therefore, no, it's clearly not a good efficiency measure.
Post reply on HN