3 ms·
The page I linked says that visa do 22 transactions for the same carbon footprint. This is really not terribly inefficient - they both use very little energy pe
by kybernetikos 3y ago
The page I linked says that visa do 22 transactions for the same carbon footprint. This is really not terribly inefficient - they both use very little energy per transaction and ethereum is much more advanced than visa and a much better platform to build a global financial system on - it can handle arbitrary transactions so I can make atomic transfers, it's credibly neutral to its transactions, its costs are borne by those using it rather than by a rent seeking corporation. Its not a back box - anyone with a good idea can suggest improvements. Besides that, rollups provide further energy savings to the extent that I expect my zksync transactions probably actually use a very similar amount of energy to visa transactions.
- ToucanLoucan 3y agoThe 22 figure is based on the post proof-of-stake energy cost. For the vast, vast majority of it's history, it used proof of work. And it's also worth noting that many, many, many cryptocurrencies still do. And, while 22/1 is infinitely better than 160,000/1, that's still 22 times more energy used to facilitate the transfer of funds, which we already have methods to do more efficiently.