undefined | Better HN

0 pointsIMTDb4y ago0 comments

The vast difference here is that the energy consumption required by Bitcoin is integral to its model. The stated goal is to make massive amount of otherwise useless computations.

If there was any way to stream porn using less electricity, we would consume less electricity for that. If there was any way to make those billboards consume less electricity, we consume less electricity.

As soon as there is a new way to do bitcoin related operations using less electricity (eg: ASICS), the security of the network decreases. And everyone moves to the new model, in order to go back to consuming a lot of electricity, in order to restore trust in the network.

On a macro scale, Bitcoin has to consume lots of electricity, any possible improvement in that area needs to be wiped out by just people going back to consuming more electricity, otherwise the model fails. The whole bitcoin trust model revolves around people being ready to waste a ton energy for it. That's not the case of porn, or billboards: the energy consumption is just a side effect and not a requirement, they have value outside of the consumed electricity. Bitcoin entire value is only dependent on how much people are willing to invest in it, which roughly translates on how much electricity is wasted.

0 comments

capableweb4y ago

> If there was any way to stream porn using less electricity, we would consume less electricity for that

In a perfect world, yes. We would use less electricity if we realize we could. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that in the real world. In reality it has to make economic sense, as capitalism is "the way of life" in the western world (and many other places), otherwise it won't be thought of. We're slowly changing this.

Bitcoin is capitalism modernized, fully on the internet and on our computers. Since computers and the internet tends to multiply everything, we now have capitalism as a protocol, intensified like never before. Since being environment friendly is not a benefit for the participant in the network, it won't be a consideration.

A big fault in the protocol, and hard to see how it can be solved in Proof of Work. Luckily there are some people working on alternatives but we have yet to see if they actually work in practice on the same scale as Bitcoin.

klyrs4y ago

Data centers and cloud providers are optimizing flops per watt, not flops per second. Energy providers are finding that wind and solar have become incredibly cheap, and transitioning as fast as they can. It took us a while to overcome political hurdles erected by the carbon-burning industry, but it turns out this stuff just makes sense on an economic level.

capableweb4y ago

Not sure it's happening as fast as you seem to indicate here. And if it is, what's the problem with Bitcoin and energy consumption, exactly the same thing will happen, but faster since Bitcoin is all about money?

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsIMTDb4y ago0 comments

The vast difference here is that the energy consumption required by Bitcoin is integral to its model. The stated goal is to make massive amount of otherwise useless computations.

0 comments

capableweb4y ago

> If there was any way to stream porn using less electricity, we would consume less electricity for that

klyrs4y ago

capableweb4y ago

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse