3 ms·
I don't think the energy criticisms are that warranted. In my mind, it speaks more to a criticism of how poor our current energy infrastructure is. I don't th
by DantesKite 5y ago
I don't think the energy criticisms are that warranted.
In my mind, it speaks more to a criticism of how poor our current energy infrastructure is.
I don't think for example in 30 years it'll be a big problem when energy becomes more abundant and building nuclear reactors are easier.
And this is coming from someone who believes Bitcoin is little more than a Ponzi scheme and most of the innovation in fintech is happening outside the cryptocurrency space.
Still, it's pretty cool that changes to Bitcoin can happen like this. Makes me think eventually they'll figure out a use case for it, besides buying lattes in El Salvador.
- concinds 5y agoIt does seem strange, because while I'm not too familiar with the PoW pro/cons arguments (I heard PoW was more secure than any other method, for now, but haven't verified that independently), it rubs me the wrong way to classify certain uses of electricity as "illegitimate". Some people prefer taking the plane over the train, should they be vilified? Some people like "driving around" to chill, not because they have a true transportation need. The offices near me are all lit up throughout the night. I wouldn't be surprised if when aggregated on a world level, there was a relatively significant percentage of energy just plain wasted. When AR/VR come out, hoping to replace zero-carbon-emitting IRL social interactions with heavy GPU/server-using gadgets, will people condemn that? I don't like the idea of piecemeal "bean counter" approach to new technology that happens to use energy; if there's zero point to PoW, they have a point, but if there are any security or decentralization benefits at all, it just seems like a non-problem. Treat it as a systemic problem, transition energy-use objects to electricity-use objects (like EVs), build more nuclear reactors, generate more clean-electricity, and have it not be an issue.
- dinobones 5y agoThe "Bitcoin is destroying the world ecosystem and is awful" crowd is way too hysterical for me to take them seriously. They write about Bitcoin like it is a serious evil and injustice in the world. It honestly feels like they're just folks who regret not investing in Bitcoin.
- endisneigh 5y agoYour comment doesn't really explain why the criticism isn't warranted. What does this have to do with how poor the current energy infrastructure is?
- DantesKite 5y agoI think they're warranted. I don't believe they're that warranted because I believe energy abundance will become more efficient over time. I don't believe it's a permanent problem, although obviously if the Bitcoin people can figure out a way to make it less power-hungry while still being secure, that's a win for everybody. So just to be clear. It's a criticism that I agree with, but I don't think it's as debilitating as a problem as most people believe.
- endisneigh 5y agoProof of work is inherently going to trend towards more power use. I’m not sure why you don’t think it’s as “debilitating as a problem as most people believe.”
- Imnimo 5y agoBut isn't the security of proof-of-work derived from it being cost prohibitive to put up more work on a fraudulent (e.g. double spending) chain? So if energy becomes an order of magnitude more abundant or cheaper, doesn't that just mean that the amount of energy spent on mining will increase by the same amount?
- em3rgent0rdr 5y agoCorrect. Bitcoin's "difficulty" parameter will tend to increase as cheaper energy costs allow the total mining network hash rate to increase.