3 ms·

> However, that wasn't really the question at issue. Weren't you the one who brought up the question in the first place? > wasting it isn't green The point i

> However, that wasn't really the question at issue. Weren't you the one who brought up the question in the first place? > wasting it isn't green The point is that renewable energy sources tend to produce maximum power at off-peak times. So to serve peak times, we need more wind and solar generation than is required for off-peak times. Since we don't have good ways to store and time-shift electricity, intermittent Bitcoin mining is one way to soak up the excess capacity off-peak to make the generation capacity economical. Should we just turn the windmills and solar panels off during off-peak times? Or should we leave them on and get clean energy at a price that's cheaper than coal?

arcticbull 5y ago
> Weren't you the one who brought up the question in the first place? Apologies if I was unclear. I was referring to the parent's statement that "fortunately, in Bitcoin whale ownership does not imply control over the network. Fortunately, Bitcoin is PoW and not PoS." My retort was that whales in Bitcoin control such a disproportionate share of the currency that if they wanted to control the network itself too, they could simply buy the miners which isn't really too dissimilar from staking in a proof of stake coin. My understanding is that each mining pool provides roughly the same security as a PoS validator. When I replied "however, that wasn't really the question at issue," what I meant that the "greenness" wasn't really the crux of my reply, rather I was suggesting that network control falls to those with the most coins regardless of whether you're operating PoS or PoW, the only difference is whether resources are consumed or not along the way.