3 ms·
This doesn't even make sense. If it isn't profitable to mine, then people won't mine. Difficulty will fall, which will mean that fewer cycles (and thus, less e
by LyndsySimon 9y ago
This doesn't even make sense.
If it isn't profitable to mine, then people won't mine. Difficulty will fall, which will mean that fewer cycles (and thus, less energy) is needed to find the next block.
The author literally took the "total cost of all energy in the network" and divided it by "total number of transactions". That's not how it works. There is effectively zero incremental cost in terms of energy usage for a transaction.
- nosuchthing 9y agoThe point is to measure the system's efficiency and energy usage. Bitcoin's Proof of Work algorithm using SHA-256 and power hungry ASICs with a bottle neck on 4-7 transactions per second (average, as latency is in 10 minute intervals) or even in the case of the controversial Bitcoin-Cash with 56 transactions per second; what Bitcoin as a service does with the type of infrastructure required for the software to run can be analyzed and defined in terms of cost of operations versus alternative services which offer similar or identical functionality.