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

Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

cbeci.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#471

Post by bccdee »

onyb wrote: post #442
Shoue wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the alternative is simply just using Proof of Stake and lowering the energy consumption by an estimated 99%, yes, we can be judgmental of how others use energy in this specific case. It's not Bitcoin/PoW or no cryptocurrencies at all, that's a false dichotomy, if that's what you're implying.

PoS lacks fairness. To participate in PoS, you need an existing stash of coins, which is inaccessible for many individuals from countries where cryptocurrencies are outlawed. Not forgetting to mention that participation in consensus would indirectly require going through KYC. PoW, on the other hand, is akin to buying Bitcoin with electricity - a borderless natural resource.

> a borderless natural resource.

Wow, I never knew ASICs grew on trees.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#472

Post by game_the0ry »

nickpp wrote: post #332

How much energy does watching porn consume? Playing video games? Watching a movie? Browsing Facebook? Using a ski chair? Visiting an amusement park? Going in vacation? Cooking your favorite type of food? Making ice cream? Driving to your friends? Listening to music? Concerts? Having a party? Banking? Casinos? As a species we use energy to meet our goals. Those goals may be situated anywhere in our hierarchy of needs.…

Agreed. Governments and financial institutions are having to resort to "virtue" and "value" arguments against bitcoin, instead of technical arguments:

- Bitcoin consumes so much energy! Think of the planet!

- Iran, China, and Russia mine bitcoin! They are our enemies!

Indeed it does reek of hypocrisy. Oh, now you care about the environment and international competition? Please...

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#473

Post by xtracto »

nelsonenzo wrote: post #436
px43 wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey there. I'm one of those people who read Schneier's Applied Cryptography in highschool in the 90s, and immediately recognized the groundbreaking potential of using asymmetric cryptography for currency. I work in information security, and have seen first hand how our existing financial infrastructure is held together with string and scotch tape. For 10 years or so, every time I heard about some big credit card thef…

So, what about refunds when corporations rip us off? And what about losing 100% of my funds when my key is lost or stolen? All keys are lost/stolen - it doesn't take a rocket degree to have observed that from human behavior. Who enforces splitting of equity when some rich dick beats his wife into submission? The courts don't control any bitcoin keys. The problems of bitcoin are proportionately larger than then proble…

All of those are the same problems money has. Refunds capability is something built on top of cash. It will be built on top of cryptocurrencies. Money can be stolen and locked and hidden and whatnot.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#474

Post by ashtonkem »

nickpp wrote: post #332

How much energy does watching porn consume? Playing video games? Watching a movie? Browsing Facebook? Using a ski chair? Visiting an amusement park? Going in vacation? Cooking your favorite type of food? Making ice cream? Driving to your friends? Listening to music? Concerts? Having a party? Banking? Casinos? As a species we use energy to meet our goals. Those goals may be situated anywhere in our hierarchy of needs.…

That’s a neat slight of hand trick you’ve pulled off there, connecting Bitcoin to entertainment in order to shame those of us concerned about Bitcoin energy usage.

Everything else you’ve listed provides subjective value to the user, which makes them hard to attack. Who can say what the value of skiing is to a society in terms of kWh? There is no way to objectively compare the value of energy spent on a ski lift vs. driving to see friends; that’s all subjective value.

But the issue is that Bitcoin isn’t supposed to provide subjective value, it’s supposed to provide objective value; it’s literally supposed to be money. Once you remember that it’s supposed to literally be money, then comparisons to ski lifts become extremely disingenuous. It also becomes fair to compare Bitcoin against other competitors that provide the exact same service to society, comparisons that make Bitcoin look very wasteful indeed.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#475

Post by UncleMeat »

minitoar wrote: post #354
nickpp wrote: post #332

How much energy does watching porn consume? Playing video games? Watching a movie? Browsing Facebook? Using a ski chair? Visiting an amusement park? Going in vacation? Cooking your favorite type of food? Making ice cream? Driving to your friends? Listening to music? Concerts? Having a party? Banking? Casinos? As a species we use energy to meet our goals. Those goals may be situated anywhere in our hierarchy of needs.…

The almighty dollar rights all wrongs. If I’m paying for it, what do you care? This is a slightly dressed up Tragedy in The Commons.

Climate change. Carbon taxes don't exist right now. So you aren't paying for it.

People who use disproportionately large amounts of electricity should absolutely be judged (yes, this includes things other than btc).

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#476

Post by totalZero »

jakupovic wrote: post #326
baxtr wrote: post #265

Ok, I have to admit that I am one of those people who knew about BTC very, very early but never bought any. Now, of course I should have mined at least 100 back in the days, but anyways. The reason I have never mined nor bought into it is that I still, to this day struggle to come up with a real reason to do so. Am I getting too old? Do I not see the "huge potential" what it may become? Don't I want to get freaking r…

The problem that you and others like you have is you don't have any BTC and now are struggling to understand why anyone else would have any. I think it's mostly from the fact you didn't get any when you should have and now there is no reason as it's expensive and again you don't have any. Simple really.

I think this is a heavy-handed reply. His personal lack of an answer to the question, "what's the value," is presumably why he didn't buy in at the beginning.

Also, even if he had two or three Bitcoin it would be a nice windfall, but not an earth-shattering event that would cause eternal jealousy.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#477

Post by Taek »

betterunix2 wrote: post #397
nickpp wrote: post #332

How much energy does watching porn consume? Playing video games? Watching a movie? Browsing Facebook? Using a ski chair? Visiting an amusement park? Going in vacation? Cooking your favorite type of food? Making ice cream? Driving to your friends? Listening to music? Concerts? Having a party? Banking? Casinos? As a species we use energy to meet our goals. Those goals may be situated anywhere in our hierarchy of needs.…

Important difference between Bitcoin and everything else you mentioned: there is no incentive to improve the energy-efficiency of mining. We went from CPU to GPU to ASIC mining, each time reducing the per-hash energy consumption, and all the miners did was hash more using the same amount of energy. Whereas, for example, the energy used to watch porn -- energy spent by all the routers, switches, and servers involved -…

Spending material wealth on mining is what makes it secure. We work on improving the per-hash cost because it makes it more difficult for someone with a brilliant technological innovation to compromise the security of the system.

And there is incentive to improve the total energy use. Every participant in the system pays for the electricity that secures bitcoin in the form of inflation and transaction fees. If some alternative to Bitcoin can provide all the same benefit but with less inflation and lower fees, then there is a good reason to switch to that alternative. And people are trying to innovate here continuously, the blockchain sector at this point is getting more investment than the AI sector.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#478

Post by bryanrasmussen »

nickpp wrote: post #332

How much energy does watching porn consume? Playing video games? Watching a movie? Browsing Facebook? Using a ski chair? Visiting an amusement park? Going in vacation? Cooking your favorite type of food? Making ice cream? Driving to your friends? Listening to music? Concerts? Having a party? Banking? Casinos? As a species we use energy to meet our goals. Those goals may be situated anywhere in our hierarchy of needs.…

>How much energy does watching porn consume?

I guess if you got stats on how much porn they watch in Argentina you would be well on your way to answering this question. Same for the rest.

I think the more interesting thing is: as bitcoin becomes more difficult to mine energy needs go up, but countries are working hard to bring their energy usage down. Can bitcoin be overtaken on the downward journey by a country, or will it always be bitcoin overtaking countries on its upward swing. Is there some country decreasing its usage as bitcoin increases its, and the two pass each other like ships in the night.

What is the next country most likely to be surpassed by bitcoin?

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#479

Post by paulgb »

whoisninja wrote: post #447
dixego wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If maintaining the infrastructure for something a miniscule percentage of the world's population benefit from requires more energy than entire countries, surely it's worth interrogating whether the benefits outweigh the costs?

let the market decide then, step away- don't mine, don't use Bitcoin if you prefer gold mining uses tons of energy we knew automobiles will pollute the environment, why didn't we stop using them altogether?

The market won’t decide optimally because the costs (climate change) are socialized across the whole population but the benefits are not.

It’s basically saying if you don’t like pollution don’t pollute, which is flawed in ways I don’t have to explain.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#480

Post by mcosta »

onyb wrote: post #442
Shoue wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the alternative is simply just using Proof of Stake and lowering the energy consumption by an estimated 99%, yes, we can be judgmental of how others use energy in this specific case. It's not Bitcoin/PoW or no cryptocurrencies at all, that's a false dichotomy, if that's what you're implying.

PoS lacks fairness. To participate in PoS, you need an existing stash of coins, which is inaccessible for many individuals from countries where cryptocurrencies are outlawed. Not forgetting to mention that participation in consensus would indirectly require going through KYC. PoW, on the other hand, is akin to buying Bitcoin with electricity - a borderless natural resource.

You pay electicity with fiat money.
Post reply on HN