27 ms·
>Because its (energy cost) overhead is still sky high and likely to remain reflected in prices? This is a huge fallacy.
by belltaco 8y ago
>Because its (energy cost) overhead is still sky high and likely to remain reflected in prices?
This is a huge fallacy.
- WorldMaker 8y agoHow is it a fallacy? Do you have a source to cite? I can easily find a few: https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoins-insane-energy-consumption-explained/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoins-insane-... Yes, it's down from the bubble peak in mining, but it is still a massive over-expenditure of energy per value. Right now, still, according to the Digiconomist stats above, ~15 average US homes can be powered for a day with the energy spent to make a single Bitcoin transaction block. That's a considerable amount of energy.
- belltaco 8y agoThe fallacy is in the second part of your statement, that it's reflected in the prices. The mining viability follows the price of bitcoin, not the other way around. The mining costs are in no way reflected in the costs of mining.