3 ms·
It's irresponsible because there's an alternative "Ethereum Plans to Cut Its Absurd Energy Consumption by 99 Percent" https://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/netw
by boxmonster 6y ago
It's irresponsible because there's an alternative
"Ethereum Plans to Cut Its Absurd Energy Consumption by 99 Percent"
https://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/ethereum-plans-to-cut-its-absurd-energy-consumption-by-99-percent https://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/ethereum-plans-...
"How One Of The Largest Free Porn Sites Uses More Than 6 Million KWh To Power Streaming Services"
https://fightthenewdrug.org/what-if-porn-is-bad-for-the-environment/ https://fightthenewdrug.org/what-if-porn-is-bad-for-the-envi...
- krupan 6y agoTotally unproven, fraught with peril. The rolling out of proof of stake was delayed years as new challenges were discovered. It’s good that somebody is giving it a try, but it’s no slam dunk. Bitcoin would be irresponsible to jump on proof of stake right now.
- boxmonster 6y agoI see. Well, here's hoping they solve it.
- shawnz 6y agoI agree that proof-of-stake systems are an interesting and promising development on top of existing cryptocurrency technology. But how does that make Bitcoin "completely irresponsible" just because it might not be as good as the best, newest available technology? Today's proof-of-stake systems probably never would have existed without Bitcoin. When proof-of-stake systems become mature then Bitcoin could adopt one, or perhaps if Bitcoin users can't reach agreement on that then maybe a new proof-of-stake based cryptocurrency will gain enough trust to overtake Bitcoin. Either way, it serves the purpose of a relatively mature decentralized store of value until then.