If only there was a way to handle transactions on a decentralized ledger using distributed computation.
A decentralized payment system might be a good idea, but Bitcoin isn't a viable implementation.
https://twitter.com/danheld/status/1351235080103096331
Disclosure: very large eth miner, using hydro electricity that would have otherwise gone to waste. Generated power is very expensive to transmit. I prefer gpus to asics because at least ethash is constrained to a more widely available piece of re-useable hardware and doesn't require the latest release in order to have the best roi.
Source? I know you are wrong, but I just want to see you talk your way out this...
> A decentralized payment system might be a good idea, but Bitcoin isn't a viable implementation.
Try maybe realizing Bitcoiners, and other alt users have been in trying to circumvent the many issues these legacy systems created in Colorado [0] alone for some time, I know and met a few in the meetups we had in Boulder and some from the early days in Denver that spearheaded lots of these initiatives that would have proven that the election results in Biden's favour were valid. Instead we got this system and people died when idiots stormed the capital.
I think before you even try to make that claim you should consider coming and meeting some of us Bitcoiners in person that have already actually changed legislation and Industry before you say such blatantly wrong things like that behind a keyboard.
Just look at the malaise and the suffering the unemployment debacle has cost our economy and added to the homelessness especially in Denver where it's horrific and has only made a mental health crisis that much worse; and all of this could have been solved with DLT and token system in less than a week if they spent even a fraction in proper work to get all those records in order. Not including the countless amount of money that was lost in fraud...
You want to talk? My fee is $250/hour with 3 hour minimum paid up front, discount available if paid in Bitcoin.
0: https://coingeek.com/denver-to-apply-blockchain-technology-i...
Take him up on this offer, I don't price match. ;)
Hashpower is used to stamp a proof-of-work onto the merkle root of each block in the blockchain. That merkle root is the same size no matter how many transactions are in the block. It takes just as much hashpower to stamp an enormous block as a tiny block.
The only thing that leads to an increasing amount of energy used in mining over time is the increasing reward that miners get from mining blocks. This reward is almost entirely from the block reward created by new blocks, which is currently 6.25 Bitcoins per block, or $306,000 at today's price. Since blocks come out every 10 minutes, that equates to $1,837,000/hr spent on electricity at every hour of the day.
As the value of Bitcoin goes up, this block reward goes up, and the amount of money people spend on electricity goes up. The number of transactions processed contributes very little to the incentive, especially when using a Bitcoin fork like BCH without an arbitrary constraint on the number of transactions per second. If you increase the number of transactions the chain can handle, then you decrease the fee for each transaction, and this lowers the block reward to miners, which lowers the amount of energy that is spent on mining.
Source: myself. I'm a Bitcoin miner: https://toom.im
I don’t see how that part follows from the rest. It makes sense that electricity consumed per time overall converges on the block reward plus tx fees per time. Since the reward is so much larger, energy consumption per time scales with price. Checks out.
But doesn’t the same apply to BCH? If the tx fees are even lower isn’t the block reward even more dominant, and so energy consumption should track price even more closely for that chain?
Also, showing my lack of knowledge about the specifics of the protocol - is the amount of work done to compute each hash really constant in the number of transactions in the block? Or just negligibly different at current tx volumes?
Except when the creators want to rerverse all txs and exit scam people that is, hence Ethereum/Classic/DAO BS saga...
Proof of stake is like saying 'a square tire works, sometimes...'
As an environmentalist and a Bitcoiner: I agree Bitcoins energy use is significant, but it's carbon footprint is the detail that is being ignored as most of its energy sources are renewable and Jack Dorsey, the guy whose company just bought another 150 million, has also put a bounty on making it even more clean.
Whereas nothing in the alt space comes close doing what Bitcoin did back in 2013 when China started to move its miners to mainly hydro and to Iceland that use geo-thermal, despite these alts absurd overly valued market cap and valuations that make no sense to anyone given it's lack of utility.
We may be on 'Team crypto,' but PoS is so absurd for security that it should be made clear to the non-initiated the many pitflls of centralized system, eg the Foundation and founders like Vitalik, that we all fought so hard to solve with this tech only to see so many projects revert to the same legacy model.