4 ms·
No one will ever say anything bad about game consoles, which consume much more electricity than cryptocurrencies =)
by Shorel 4y ago
No one will ever say anything bad about game consoles, which consume much more electricity than cryptocurrencies =)
- michaelwww 4y agoOr king size refrigerators and secondary home freezer a lot of people feel the need to have
- Ekaros 4y agoOr televisions and mobile phones and networks with their nearly constantly on transmitters...
- kaba0 4y agoCome on, do you seriously compare something that you and nigh everyone use multiple hours each day and effects you on a physical basis to something as useless as cryptos?
- andruby 4y agoI think my iPhone SE has a ~7 Wh battery. It needs about 80% extra charge each day, which means its consumption is roughly 5.5 Wh per day or about 2 kWh/year. At the previous 112 TWh/year ETH was using before the merge, that would be the equivalent of 56 billion iPhone SE's. Think about that. The energy usage of ETH's POW used the equivalent power of 50B smartphones.
- cryptonym 4y agoThis remains a far better usage of energy than ETH. It's not optimal but at least it's preserving some food. You can hardly do worse than consuming energy just to eventually get a proof that you burned a big amount of energy.
- Gigachad 4y agoGame consoles provide utility.
- Shorel 4y agoTo the gamers, yes. As these cryptocurrencies have provided utility to the miners in the past. My point is, everyone is arguing here thinking only about their own particular self-interest, while pretending to be arguing about some abstract universal good. And cryptocurrency energy usage is now a low-hanging fruit argument. If we really cared, we would cut much more than just that.
- quickthrower2 4y agoPoW is different to all other categories of energy usage and should be feared more. Ill let you have a think about what the reason for this is. If you need a hint, read the bitcoin whitepaper.
- Shorel 4y agoThat sounds like fearmongering to me. And also condescending fearmongering, as you assume I need 'hints'. Going back to your argument about all other categories of energy usage, transport using ICE should be feared more, in particular the way huge ships not only pollute the atmosphere but also the oceans. In fact, I believe you intended to mean only electricity in your comment, but the condescending got the best of you.
- quickthrower2 4y agoWith PoW energy usage is roughly proportional to the $ price of the asset regardless of the number of transactions it can process. A successful Bitcoin means higher and higher energy usage. Whereas anything else success means making it more efficient not less.
- Shorel 4y agoAnd every four years it will double in price, and right now it consumes 0.5% of all electricity, which means in 56 years it will consume 82% of all electricity, assuming we produce roughly the same electricity as today. Is this your argument?
- kaba0 4y agoIt consuming 0.5% is already such an absolutely huge red flag that I really can’t fathom any reason to continue with it.
- quickthrower2 4y agoNot really. It is more immediate than that. Right now we heavily rely on CO2 emitting power generation. And if bitcoin becomes wildly successful, or simply gets into another bubble, while trying to combat climate change, and it stays on PoW that is an issue.
- kaba0 4y agoAnd affect multiple orders of magnitude more people, bettering their life quality. Hardly comparable in good faith.