An empty bitcoin block and a full bitcoin block use the same amount of energy
Use and El Salvador’s use has no influence on that
The hyperbole only marginalizes yourself
Use and El Salvador’s use has no influence on that
The hyperbole only marginalizes yourself
This news appears to have spiked the price of Bitcoin.
Presumably, if El Salvador actually implements this policy and starts using Bitcoin that would also increase demand for Bitcoin and increase its price.
Additionally, a full bitcoin block with high fees pays for more mining expenditure than an empty one. So if there is high demand for block space, that also can increase mining energy usage.
But anyway:
1. A transaction creating a channel factory for 6.4 million different keyholders would be too large to fit in a block.
2. 6.4 million users on LN would be a great target for flood and loot[0].
[0]https://medium.com/blockchains-huji/flood-loot-a-systemic-at...
The total value of the miner reward does increase with price, but because of halvings every 210,000 blocks it's a slower rate than the price increases on its own.
Note here, https://www.blockchain.com/charts/miners-revenue, that the current miner reward (in USD) is currently lower than it was at the peak of the 2017 bull run, despite the unit price being approximately double.
I said how it works
How can you find fault with someone trying to make more money? This is capitalism at work. Not saying the energy argument for crypto is moot, but it is certainly blown way the heck out of proportion. Let's regulate lithium mining while we are at it, no?
Economic advantage is a like gas in a vacuum, it will spread everywhere it can, until it cannot.
But it's hard for me to think of another thing that makes a worldwide competition for who can waste the most energy, with a massive crowdfunded prize every 10 minutes, and the crowd that has paid into the system to fund the prizes so far wants me to join in funding it so the prize can get bigger.
Edit: for example, take Cathie Wood's claim that Bitcoin will be worth $500,000. If that happens before 2024, that would make the reward for the winner of the useless-hashing race $3.1 million plus change, every 10 minutes. Awesome!!! That kind of money can buy a lot of useless-hashing ASICs and energy to run them. The smart miner had better spend most of it that way, just to be able to keep up with the others in the race.
We can argue until the cows come home about which energy expenses increase human well-being, and which are “wasteful” (Adam Smith hated opera and thought it was a waste of money), but the only fair answer is to ask individuals and firms to pay their fair share proportional to usage, be it crypto mining or cloud marketing analytics or Christmas lights.
Your dissertation seems to be unrelated to this conversation. Your topic sentence says “thats not an argument.” Or “thats not how it works” and proceeds to not disprove that at all, derailing every conversation with something completely unrelated
This is against HN guidelines
I wasn't commenting on whether use of the network makes it more attractive to compete for increasingly scarce bitcoin with sustained or greater use of energy
Its not that hard, just imagine you are taking a standardized test, the accurate answer is the one you choose