Post A3LoHfLqm4hPMS2R3g by harding@hash.social
(DIR) More posts by harding@hash.social
(DIR) Post #A3LiShc06voVpfTK6q by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T03:23:42Z
0 likes, 5 repeats
"The average energy consumption for one single Bitcoin transaction in 2020 was 741 kilowatt-hours."https://www.statista.com/statistics/881541/bitcoin-energy-consumption-transaction-comparison-visa/
(DIR) Post #A3LjCgD5eetyo0kBbE by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T03:33:42Z
2 likes, 2 repeats
Just to put this into perspective:The average value of a Bitcoin transaction is currently $119 and requires energy worth roughly $100 (the world average price is $0.14 per kWh).đđđ
(DIR) Post #A3LjCgU6dOVremhm7c by Koishi@udongein.xyz
2021-01-18T03:34:31.153710Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom > on average:blobcatsweat:
(DIR) Post #A3LjLjgE7gXqApgsOu by orekix@anime.website
2021-01-18T03:36:09.019757Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom is this right? what the fuck
(DIR) Post #A3Ljai9276zLkuIz8i by thestrongest@shitposter.club
2021-01-18T03:38:51.830457Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom That's shit but visa should have thought about that before blacklisting people and forcing them to use bitcoin
(DIR) Post #A3LkP8kLU0FWjrnvIO by deezthugs@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T03:47:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom Yeah!!!
(DIR) Post #A3Ll3QVUrwdjPC4Kxc by Imani@social.seattle.wa.us
2021-01-18T03:37:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom I read an article that argued that Bitcoin has become a simple investment vehicle based solely on perceived value of it's investors and that it is and always has been useless as a currency partly because it simply can't perform transactions fast enough. The number of actual Bitcoin transactions is microscopic.
(DIR) Post #A3Ll3QkjxGpiATCVii by kline@mastodon.sdf.org
2021-01-18T03:55:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Imani @fribbledom I think this is pretty much spot on.Bitcoin has achieved almost none of it's goals, becoming digital gold instead of digital cash. It's slow, expensive to use, it's privacy measures are ineffective, and the value is too variable.What is has achieved is breaking the ground and that such a system is useful. I think there's a place for cryptocurrency, but none of the current implementations are going to be THE cryptocurrency.
(DIR) Post #A3Lmw8UHfPArOr9Xg8 by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T04:00:52Z
1 likes, 3 repeats
More perspective?The global energy consumption in 2017 was 22.3 terawatt hours.If we moved all financial transactions over to Bitcoin, we'd require over 1000 terawatt hours... each day(!) for Bitcoin transactions alone(!).That doesn't even factor in that Bitcoin's energy consumption will be exponential to the amount of transactions.
(DIR) Post #A3Ln3XkS97pzlvFR6e by einziggurat@shitposter.club
2021-01-18T04:17:41.891467Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom now do a back of the envelope for how many lives have been taken for the petrodollar or narcodollar.
(DIR) Post #A3Lo333mLPukY2cD6e by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T04:28:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom How much of that was electricity that wasn't going to be used anyway, or which was going to be used for something else you'd consider unproductive?
(DIR) Post #A3Lo6vsQzb2PQeA3No by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T04:21:21Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
Still believe that Bitcoin is the future of financial transactions?I'm sorry, but no, that's laughable.Bitcoin and the blockchain are amazing technologies, but they don't scale for what we are currently using them for.Yes, there are enough clueless people in the market so that you can still make a quick buck (with a bit of luck anyway), but it's just one big bubble waiting to burst - by design.Does that mean all crypto currencies suck? No, we're working on better alternatives.
(DIR) Post #A3Lo6w5CE9FK4E8FH6 by hanakookie@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T04:24:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom or maybe you are just wrong. But you are free to do as you please. Many have tried. All have failed. Adding another one will do no harm.
(DIR) Post #A3Lo6wNz6IH70UvFYm by john@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T04:29:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hanakookie @fribbledom All have failed? I guess I have to wonder how you define failure.
(DIR) Post #A3LoAOxVK7qIUdBddQ by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T04:29:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding Roll a dice đ
(DIR) Post #A3LoHfLqm4hPMS2R3g by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T04:31:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom I suspect very few Bitcoin miners are paying mean or median rates. They're able to locate their facilities near to generation sources, minimizing line loss. They're also able to locate near facilities (such as hydro plants) that have excess capacity, allowing them to achieve lower rates. How much lower, I don't know, but I suspect it's quite the discount.
(DIR) Post #A3LoIM6PpKu1x29DTE by hanakookie@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T04:31:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@john @fribbledom bitcoin is $700B. Pretty much means all that have tried has failed.
(DIR) Post #A3LoLtChDJ3JTvlpAG by lucifargundam@qoto.org
2021-01-18T04:32:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom Bitcoin was a stepping stone.
(DIR) Post #A3LoNO6XoKOHbmbizI by john@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T04:32:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hanakookie @fribbledom How? How does that correlate at all? The Euro represents a lot of value, too. That doesn't mean Linux has failed.
(DIR) Post #A3LoYSIeYLgZnzY56O by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T04:34:28Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@fribbledom That assumes the same marginal rate of electrical use, but there are more efficient ways to make payments on Bitcoin, such as using payment channels which can support an unlimited number of payments with just one on-chain transaction to open the channel and one to close the channel when it's no longer useful.Scaling up Bitcoin doesn't require scaling up its electrical use. The only electrical use Bitcoin requires long time is just enough to discourage attackers.
(DIR) Post #A3LoZlQwtpRzRB3LmK by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T04:34:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lucifargundam I absolutely agree and I don't consider it a failure at all. On the contrary, it's a huge success, without a doubt. But its design is incredibly flawed for its current use-case, and eventually it'll just be remembered as the first iteration of crypto currencies.
(DIR) Post #A3Lp3u2nRzeqpV7x7A by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T04:40:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom I believe Bitcoin is *part* of the future of financial transactions, but just like there are multiple ways to make financial transactions today (cash, debit cards, credit cards, gift cards, checks, wire transfers, etc), the cases where Bitcoin is a poor fit can be satisfied by cooperating systems.If you can describe something that's clearly an improvement to Bitcoin, and which is technically feasible, I don't know why Bitcoin wouldn't adopt it, obviating the need for alternatives.
(DIR) Post #A3Lpbky5hW5CWk4Kh6 by htimsxela@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T04:46:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom this isn't a great comparison, a bitcoin transaction and a visa transaction represent very different things (functionally). And having more payments route through bitcoin does not mean it will consume more energy, higher level protocols actually have the opposite effect. It is an energy intensive network, but energy use in and of itself isn't bad! It just becomes a question of whether the energy use is a net gain for humanity in some way.
(DIR) Post #A3Lpozm5xhJMDHlqTo by lucifargundam@qoto.org
2021-01-18T04:48:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom My only recent use of BC is via robinhood where I can make a few bucks each day buying/selling due to its volatility.
(DIR) Post #A3Lpw3mFTlgaebD9Wq by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T04:49:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@htimsxela Ignore the graph for VISA transactions, it's really not what I'm referring to here. It's just a source for Bitcoin's energy consumption.
(DIR) Post #A3LpzwyIixWahlhgH2 by shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club
2021-01-18T04:50:38.067407Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom that's not how any of this works, same with the cost of $100 per transaction figure you pulled. just think it over, would anyone pay $100 to transact $19?
(DIR) Post #A3Lqwbh1TtkHnOajmi by Nikolai_Kingsley@dobbs.town
2021-01-18T04:32:14Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@fribbledom which generates more heat - bitcoin transactions, or the hot air from people who push bitcoin?
(DIR) Post #A3Lr4NW24lLm8t9lZY by john@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T05:02:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hanakookie @fribbledom My point being success and failure should be regarded relative to your goals.I'm certainly not going to transact with other people via BTC. That would be stupid. You could instead use something that's fast and cheap, or you could use something that maintains privacy. Or you could use BTS and just throw money away for no reason.So if you're looking for payment processing, BTC is a failure.IMO distributed ledgers are mostly useful for their contracts. BTC has none.
(DIR) Post #A3LrIaCJim3RWrhxei by john@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T05:05:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hanakookie @fribbledom If what you want is a store of value, BTC does a better job than many others. If that's what you want, then by all means.Personally I'd want my store of wealth to be better tied to my expenses and/or risks, for example an index of stablecoins or something like that. But maybe that doesn't align with your goals or portfolio or whatever.
(DIR) Post #A3LrXnK3CpYSZvZx8C by a@pdx.social
2021-01-18T05:07:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom That mostly doesnât matter. As long as theyâre hooked up to a grid and/or public utility, the power theyâre consuming is (nearly) fungible within that grid. Their consumption keep prices up for others and causes more generation sources to produce more output. Thatâs bad in itself, but especially as dirtier sources become more expensive than cleaner, itâs really awful.
(DIR) Post #A3LrnIJwEnTT3ruvsO by hanakookie@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T05:10:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@john @fribbledom ive been through this before. It doesnât matter what you want or me. The market decides. And the market has decided itâs bitcoin. The rest is just tech. There have been many that just canât accept that. And the basket of coins isnât the right approach. Embrace scarcity.
(DIR) Post #A3Ls6xD0RNEnNN36oK by john@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T05:14:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hanakookie @fribbledom "The rest is just tech." - exactly, which is why I brought up the analogy to Linux. A lot of these systems are primarily computation platforms, and their success & failure should be judged as such."the market has decided itâs bitcoin" - How do you figure? BTC's price is high, but plenty are doing OK enough. This is not zero-sum."basket of coins" - I said basket of stablecoins. I'm playing with derivatives that are connected to legacy assets including fiat.
(DIR) Post #A3Lt13weaAJmU79fpQ by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T05:23:20Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Apparently some more clarification is needed here. I don't even mean to bash on Bitcoin. As I've said in this thread and many times before: it's an amazing and successful technology. By all means, go ahead and use it for whatever you like! It's great.But please, just don't pretend and keep pushing it as the revolution that will be replacing our entire finance system. It just won't.
(DIR) Post #A3LtASnbXqUKAsPBAG by phagusX@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T05:26:10Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@fribbledom yes ... and fiat has no futurethe alternative is using fiat and let your wealth leeched by unknown entity. the increase of btc power doesn't have to be followed. Increase of power is basically caused by hashwar. using pre-existing BTC and combined w/ altcoin can do something about fiat as of nowadays
(DIR) Post #A3LtDGel9CnhNpbZXE by Azure@tailswish.industries
2021-01-18T05:26:40.775151Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom It kind of makes me angry how much of this is the result of bad economic policy making them build a proof of work that gets ever-more-difficult.
(DIR) Post #A3LtDl79uBLJqb7fxw by dentropy@pleroma.newatlantis.xyz
2021-01-18T05:26:46.324430Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom @htimsxela Bitcoin is a proof of concept taken too seriously. (POW)Proof of Work is a method for bootstrapping (POS)Proof of Stake. POS systems can be sharded without reducing security while POW systems can't. POS systems also have the ability to penalize miners rather than only reward them. I believe long term the bitcoin blockchain will be run as a side chain on one of the many POS blockchains.
(DIR) Post #A3LtL9Q7w0eRG3WI7M by Azure@tailswish.industries
2021-01-18T05:28:06.158650Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom In /GENERAL/ I've been kind of frustrated that the goldbug mentality of the designer(s) of bitcoin contributed to it being less usable as a currency, from the mining overhead to the speculation that makes its value swing wildly.
(DIR) Post #A3LthEpeUjVMPezVT6 by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T05:31:52Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@Azure I agree, at this point it's an entirely speculative investment that comes with a high risk. Which is part of why I don't consider it a reasonable alternative to "regular" money.This might or might not work itself out in the future, though. I'd need to consult my crystal ball for that, though.
(DIR) Post #A3LtiOEF2mMRqU2e9Y by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T05:32:10Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@Azure I agree, at this point it's an entirely speculative investment that comes with a high risk. Which is part of why I don't consider it a reasonable alternative to "regular" money.This might or might not work itself out in the future, though. I'd need to consult my crystal ball for that.
(DIR) Post #A3LuvGRBQGuNOrnWnQ by malin@linuxrocks.online
2021-01-18T05:45:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom I'm not sure why you're saying it doesn't scale.I'm currently using them for swapping money and it's been working fine so far.
(DIR) Post #A3LvE0QfAKvrFkUWJM by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T05:49:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom my understanding is that an awful lot of generation is lost[1], even in the U.S. (it's worse in, e.g., China where they've built an excess of hydroelectric). Bitcoin miners are often able to bid for those excesses, benefiting themselves with a lower price (more mining profits) and benefiting society by helping to fund renewable energy sources like solar and hydro that have periodic excesses which other industries may not be willing to pay as much for.[1] https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/commodities/energy
(DIR) Post #A3LvGTbbevb0Jzmv6u by passenger@anime.website
2021-01-18T05:49:40.319548Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@shironeko @fribbledom @Koishi @lunch the energy cost of a transaction is just the transaction fee (currently $10). The rest is electricity spent on mining divided by number of transactions. If we decreased the number of transactions 1000 times, the average transaction cost would be 700 megawatt hours.
(DIR) Post #A3LvlvOwMi7VVOrL60 by passenger@anime.website
2021-01-18T05:55:20.633417Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
@thestrongest @fribbledom >visa should have thought about that before blacklisting people and forcing them to use bitcoinyea I'd suggest making your own old-school currency but that's illegal so...
(DIR) Post #A3Lw1YcapNntULhQPI by wago@zap.dog
2021-01-18T04:48:37Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Well Visa has 20,000 employees. I presume that footprint is included? I think the cost of bitcoin transaction is greatly overstated. Why would anybody use it? Why would banks including Paypal go big on Bitcoin?
(DIR) Post #A3Lw9ylVVf66t9sum0 by hanakookie@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T05:59:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@john @fribbledom a lot of these are computation. But they all rely on their monetary policy first and foremost. You think ppl demand smart contracts or stablecoins over the SOV and NgU tech. They donât. Here is a wise thing I learned in the 90âs. Fish in the pond where ppl are catching fish. As for now as basket of stablecoins doesnât exist. Nor does it do any better than just having USD.
(DIR) Post #A3LwBNUV48Bfrbb3qK by lunch@cybre.space
2021-01-18T04:45:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom people need to stop with this "Bitcoin can't scale FUD"lightning exists today and it works great, with protocol upgrades coming soon to make it even better and *way* more scalable as-isthere's also no reason that the zk-rollups that *already work on ethereum* can't work on bitcoin once we fork in more expressive primitives to bitcoin's script system to verity snark proofspeople love to suck off shitcoins for being "way more scalable than bitcoin" without actually understanding the sacrifices they give to make that happen and then cite energy usage as why bitcoin can't work
(DIR) Post #A3LwBNjk9SNecsjEbQ by lunch@cybre.space
2021-01-18T04:49:54Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom also a point on this:>Bitcoin's energy consumption will be exponential to the amount of transactions.this is also just untrue, at worst it's linearand with L2 protocols we can fit essentially unbounded tx volume into the same block space
(DIR) Post #A3LwEEkE2aw7bdJcQa by lunch@cybre.space
2021-01-18T04:58:51Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom points I want to emphasize are:* we know how to make it scale as far as we need to, it's a matter of ensuring it's secure and that the technology is something you can actually trust with money* nobody thinks that proof of work is perfectly fine so we want to take advantage of it best we can now that it exists* hashrate does not directly translate into carbon emissions, miners have the freedom to move wherever power is cheapest and the cheapest power availability is in areas with abundant renewables anyways, and hashrate will not grow without bound into the future
(DIR) Post #A3LwphX5yBifbc2QyW by crunklord420@kiwifarms.cc
2021-01-18T06:07:14.512681Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@passenger @shironeko @Koishi @fribbledom @lunch another bitcoin power usage thread that doesn't acknowledge that most mining power comes from stranded hydropower that would otherwise be wasted (by dumping excess water)
(DIR) Post #A3LwwhHVIr7gqw56vY by john@liberdon.com
2021-01-18T06:08:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hanakookie I know that some people do care about that, because a number (not all) of those projects are chugging along just fine. You don't have to be the #1 store of wealth in order to be a successful compute platform.If your goal is to make money, being on the long side of stablecoins is a terrible strategy. I'd hope that's not what people are there for. But my opinion on that isn't super relevant as I'm not actually using crypto to store wealth or make money.
(DIR) Post #A3Lx35afppklz460mm by shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club
2021-01-18T06:09:38.352404Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@passenger @Koishi @fribbledom @lunch yes, it just points out the ridiculousness of the calculation. VISA doesn't issue US dollar does it.
(DIR) Post #A3M0UTeKn9iSHbYkHA by threed@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T06:40:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom that's not how Bitcoin transactions work. The power consumption does not depend on number of transactions or the price.
(DIR) Post #A3M0UU3VHZqhXfKqVU by fribbledom@mastodon.social
2021-01-18T06:44:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@threed Can you elaborate a bit more?
(DIR) Post #A3M0UUbtDjM3GJQJ6W by fuxoft@kompost.cz
2021-01-18T06:48:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom @threed The Bitcoin works the same way regardless if 10 computers or 10 million computers worldwide are mining it. In both cases there is 1 new block mined every 10 minutes (approximately) and the mining difficulty is adjusted automatically.
(DIR) Post #A3M0ZfPEVcxmC0yERU by mistermonster@firebird.zone
2021-01-18T06:49:09.839611Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom so I've been reading the comments in this thread from you and others, and I have to say it is a shame that this study is behind a paywall, because I'd love to see how they came to that figure.I'm going to reason through this using USD, because miners pay their bills in USD, and so that is one of the biggest factors affecting transaction fees, the others being the hash rate and the tx mempool.Just looking st the basic economics (that you already did above) $100 per transaction average for all of last year is just not possible. The highest average transaction fee ever was just under $56 US, 3 years ago. Miners have to pay their bills or they go broke. If their cost per transaction were 100, or even close, mining would not be feasible for the miners at current fee levels.The current average transaction fee is worth $8, and the highest it has been in the last 2 years was a few days ago, at 18 dollars. The average cost of a transaction over the course of 2020 was much less than it is now. How does a miner pay $100 dollars per transaction, and still charge less than $8, for a whole year. How does the entire mining industry do this? The answer is they don't.It is possible that miners are paying significantly less for electricity than the global average. But an order of magnitude less? And that is only taking electricity costs into account, not additional overhead. I'd like to see this study, I don't like that it is behind a wall, I don't know if you got an account just to read it or had an account and looked at the details of it, but if you didn't, it is very irresponsible to share things you haven't looked at the details of as if you're certain they're factual. I would be willing to bet that the study is blatantly misleading or at the very least very flawed in it's methodology. There's just no way that 1 single transaction on average takes 741 kWh to mine. Maybe in the future, but not right now.
(DIR) Post #A3M0rwaPN86wgluef2 by roadriverrail@signs.codes
2021-01-18T06:52:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@malin @fribbledom "I use it personally" is a scale of 1, though, so it's basically the opposite of a scalability concern.
(DIR) Post #A3M1PDcB56KD3fbhKq by pj@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T06:58:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom What's your opinion of Lightning? The energy thing isn't a problem because miners will become more energy efficient and I think BTC value will outpace energy cost. Also energy savings across endless industries, from the legal profession to air conditioning banks to armored trucks, you can even save precious trees from becoming paper bills, checks, money orders...
(DIR) Post #A3M2pEXENlp1OaGIkK by a@pdx.social
2021-01-18T07:14:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom 1) I think youâre misunderstanding ârejected energyâ. It includes losses at all stages, including in the generators and transformers; it is not âlost due to idleâ. Yes, transmission losses are in here & increase with distance, but Iâd be surprised to find that be much of the loss by %.2) Increasing consumption does not benefit society. Renewables are growing regardless. There is no subsidy effect; offset by the increased demand, to say nothing of the environmental impact.
(DIR) Post #A3M3hlG6vq3gWZFrxg by murtezayesil@fosstodon.org
2021-01-18T07:24:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Bitcoin: An experiment on whether a currency system can be built on blockchain technology.Result: Yes, but mining is required which is can get energy hungry.Ethereum: An experiment on whether crypto-currencies be more energy efficient.Result: Yes. Single Ethereum transaction consumes 1/15 of what a Bitcoin transaction consumes.Crypto currencies are NOT yet affordable replacements to regular currencies. There is more optimizations and test to do.https://digiconomist.net/ethereum-energy-consumption@fribbledom
(DIR) Post #A3M3x0dW2bHaYoTP8q by murtezayesil@fosstodon.org
2021-01-18T07:26:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Sorry for image with transparent background. It isn't readable on web interface due to transparency. Open image in new tab to be able to read.
(DIR) Post #A3M60usFbgw7kuM94K by dsfgs@activism.openworlds.info
2021-01-18T07:48:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lucifargundamThis sounds like the tired #DeVries tropes from 2017, repackaged.Pretty sure they said we'd all be dead by 2019 if we still used BTC.Their talking points⌠ugh.#CambridgeUniversity debunked the bitcoin-is-a killer trope. They weren't even trying to, spun the result so it'd sound as bad as possible. Was yawn.Yes, #bitcoin is designed to use a tiny fraction of the energy found on the planet.The #fiatWars, now there's a real horror story, #backedByMenWithGuns.@fribbledom
(DIR) Post #A3M8bLQAaBo8QIifmy by lucifargundam@qoto.org
2021-01-18T08:19:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@dsfgs @fribbledom People who spout things about economics and currency exchange, etc should know fully what they're talking about. Unfortunately this isn't the case.Understandably (though regrettably) most bitcoin enthusiasts don't know the full details/spectrum of its implications. So such a report is obtusely (largely) false. This is because this requires extensive technical knowledge on bitcoin and crypto in general.Thank goodness we don't all bank on the the words of strangers.
(DIR) Post #A3M9O3I6mJn4NqAsVM by htimsxela@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T08:27:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom right, fair enough in regards to the visa comparison. I think its interesting to consider that the energy being consumed is directly proportional to the security gained. The more valuable a thing is, the more security we want for it. The more efficiently we can gain that security, the better. In that way, I've been musing that security gained via energy spent on computation might actually be a very efficient form of gaining security. Less obfuscation, which creates inefficiency.
(DIR) Post #A3M9o4wHH3L31WNEYa by fluffy@social.handholding.io
2021-01-18T08:32:36.598223Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom digital yuan
(DIR) Post #A3MA9yAN8Rv0OCP9QO by htimsxela@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T08:36:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom In regards to bitcoin, it is convenient to point at it and say "look how much energy!!", because such a large portion of the security expenditure is very directly quantifiable. Trying to do this same (energy:security) analysis for other secure systems can get really tough. Ultimately, it isn't about 'how much', its about 'how efficiently'.In that regards, I hope that L2s will scale btc, such that the per payment energy costs shrink substantially. Its possible, I hope.
(DIR) Post #A3MADPEewuuPDB35BA by berkes@bitcoinhackers.org
2021-01-18T08:37:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@htimsxela @fribbledom Often forgot in these comparisons, is that energy consumption is not a function of amount of transactions. But a function of "security". Often critics imply a correlation between amount transactions and energy used. Other limits disregarded, BTC can scale up to 100x visa, or process 1 tx/day, with the same mining-energy used.That is not to say that energy use is a concern. Just that it does not related to throughput (much).
(DIR) Post #A3MFXbqmFzVHtkKaoq by dsfgs@activism.openworlds.info
2021-01-18T09:36:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lucifargundamIf you are aware of fundamental problems with the technology, feel free to point them out.It's also libreSoftware so can be soft or hardFork, if people are convinced by an assessment and improvementProposal.@fribbledom
(DIR) Post #A3MI2eplPhZM2Mn1MG by scribe@mastodon.sdf.org
2021-01-18T07:50:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom Out of interest, have you come across any decent links/resources on alternative energy for crypto, or efforts to move btc to a more sustainable approach at all?
(DIR) Post #A3MI2f5MTi2uok5Tfc by murtezayesil@fosstodon.org
2021-01-18T10:04:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@scribe Mining is necessary for BTC to survive. But miners collectively consume more energy than some countries.If you can develop more efficient algorithm, it still will take time for people to adopt and update their setups. Note that ASIC devices are efficient devices for computing 1 algorithm. So, miners using ASIC devices are less likely to upgrade.BTC served its purpose, less drop it and build something better with what was learned.@fribbledom
(DIR) Post #A3MIJXNcNeAFqGfpLc by mansr@society.oftrolls.com
2021-01-18T10:07:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom Who spends that energy?
(DIR) Post #A3MLqSKOU5QNamYPE8 by FreePietje@x0f.org
2021-01-18T10:46:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom I can't believe I'm doing/saying this ...I (like to) see the bitcoin blockchain as an independent and uncensorable base layer (L1) for a (new) financial system. Anchored to that base layer are/will be higher levels (L2/L3/...) where most txs will take place.The (very) high energy consumption is needed so that no single entity/country can control it.Right now Visa/Mastercard/USgov determine whether someone is allowed to take part in trade. And I think that very wrong/dangerous.
(DIR) Post #A3MYlYCaW32LlatUhs by scribe@mastodon.sdf.org
2021-01-18T13:12:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@murtezayesil @fribbledom Thanks - I get the basics, and have looked a little into energy soiurces for miners (eg excess hydropower in china) but was after pointers to discussions and efforts sabout the practicals of alternatives. That could include dropping it and switching to other efforts. Any good alternatives you would recommend?
(DIR) Post #A3MgqyX2qfLWVbYngm by malin@linuxrocks.online
2021-01-18T14:42:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@roadriverrail The scale is all the people on the blockchain atm. It's already working at scale, and it could get bigger without technological worry.
(DIR) Post #A3Mh7NdFILaczLHc36 by roadriverrail@signs.codes
2021-01-18T14:45:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@malin I'm aware of how to describe scale (and thus also why "it works for me" is irrelevant in a scale convo). The scale of blockchain use is miniscule compared to the actual financial system, and it will have issues operating at that scale.
(DIR) Post #A3MhFiR3pe2FpGYgKm by malin@linuxrocks.online
2021-01-18T14:47:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@roadriverrail Allow me to rephrase:- It's currently working at a large scale. I have personally verified the scale and the workingness many times.Perhaps in the future it'll suffer problems, but I'm not sure what problems people are talking about - there's no detail.
(DIR) Post #A3MhWnmzBFoRLvxe2C by roadriverrail@signs.codes
2021-01-18T14:50:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@malin It's such common knowledge it has its own Wikipedia page; no need to burn space rehashing it.
(DIR) Post #A3Mmg14Jg08oupHRE8 by r@social.up.edu.ph
2021-01-18T09:08:06Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom but but blockchain, paired with AI and delivered via 5G is the end-all solution to all tech problems, right?
(DIR) Post #A3MpRdl5qUScQf7q6a by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T16:18:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom according to this, the annual transmission losses in California during 2008 were roughly 1/4 of the current Bitcoin subsidy (which, at present, is roughly the maximum amount rational miners should spend on *both* capital expenses and production costs like electricity). http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2010/ph240/harting1/I don't understand why you think increased demand doesn't help fund increased supply. Isn't that how the market works?
(DIR) Post #A3Mpw1wwT5NW8z9u8e by edd@freeradical.zone
2021-01-18T16:23:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@kline @Imani @fribbledom The value being too variable is the real kicker; the rest could be suffered through to a degree. Currencies only work if the price of goods don't fluctuate wildly day over day. Otherwise you just get rentiers profiteering on basic goods at the expense of everyone else.
(DIR) Post #A3MqRjmzWXa75RciZs by a@pdx.social
2021-01-18T16:30:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom That paper puts transmission line losses at 6.8% of consumption; not going to do the math right now, but that means lower as % of production. So thatâs the hard upper limit for what miners are saving by locating close to generation.Yes, in market systems, increasing demand tends to lead to increased supply. But also increased prices! It isnât a subsidy. And given the current energy markets, thatâs likely to keep dirtier sources more active longer. Net loss for the world.
(DIR) Post #A3My7Hiqxt9FsgRjX6 by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T17:56:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom I could nitpick on your analysis, but I do think some miners are likely competing with traditional energy usage and so are driving up prices and keeping fossil fuels in slightly increased use. Those effects are small given the comparatively small amount of Bitcoin's subsidy ($12B/year at current prices, not all of which goes to power). Alas, I haven't heard of any alternative way to accomplish Bitcoin's trust minimization without Proof of Work.
(DIR) Post #A3Myhi7OIsRMAfIDGi by harding@hash.social
2021-01-18T18:02:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom in general, it's obviously better to use less energy, but most solutions require tradeoffs and it's worth considering those carefully. IMO, Bitcoin is an interesting and useful tool whose costs are pretty minor compared to those of other tools we routinely use as part of a technological society. Long term, Bitcoin's subsidy disappears and it'll only use the amount of energy people directly pay for through self-choosen transaction fees.
(DIR) Post #A3NNBg8YdEGVc7f3Nw by a@pdx.social
2021-01-18T22:37:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom ...which makes it a terrible technology for a currency. The argument seems almost entirely backwards: âwe canât do bitcoin without all these terrible downsidesâ. Okay: donât do bitcoin.
(DIR) Post #A3NdUcxQHB7iWNVhYW by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T01:39:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom but what about Bitcoin's upsides as a fully digital trust-minimized currency? I.e., a currency you can save and spend even when powerful people try to prevent you from saving or spending. To me, that seems useful in the same way many other things powered by electricity are also useful.
(DIR) Post #A3NjE3Htj8uIz8ZCpk by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T02:44:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom Those benefits , in addition to being only nebulously defined, are theoretical, and will remain so under Bitcoin. It just canât do the job itâs designed for.Itâs also interesting to think about how that mythology is always framed (who are the âpowerful peopleâ and why are they restricting your money?).
(DIR) Post #A3NkH0H5UC22Sm9v9s by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T02:55:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom "fully digital" and "trust minimized" aren't nebulously defined, at least not deliberately. By fully digital, I mean it can be transferred over a communication channel (e.g. the 'net). By trust minimized, I mean that you need minimal trust in other people to make reasonable use of it.Here's an example of powerful people preventing many legal businesses from gaining access to normal financial services: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point (I can cite other examples, if you'd like)
(DIR) Post #A3Nl3wU6MlBwtja9fU by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T03:04:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom Those are not nebulously defined, but theyâre also not benefits. Theyâre features of the system, sure, but the actual benefit for users, relative to what we have today, is nebulous.âFully digitalâ is a good feature. I presume the supposed benefit is easier use and ubiquity. But Bitcoin remains a huge step backwards on those fronts relative to what we have today. Or does that feature provide some other benefit Iâm missing?
(DIR) Post #A3Nl5vfMNcHWwGnNnE by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T02:47:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom bitcoin is some super clever math, really. They solve some very old, very hard problems. But itâs not suitable for a currency, at all. Itâs good to examine where your points of trust in a system are, but âzero trustâ doesnât make sense for most financial transactions (perhaps any, aside from currency exchange, although Iâm not sure Iâm prepared to go that far). The human interactions behind financial interactions are built on trust. There is no technical fix for that.
(DIR) Post #A3Nl5vpHmiDnR3RJGS by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:04:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom sure, when you buy a coffee, you trust the seller not to poison you, and Bitcoin can't fix that. However, a seller who accepts bitcoin doesn't need to trust that your payment is valid. They can verify that themselves. One benefit is that this lowers fraud losses, allowing lower prices; a second benefit is that it means the seller doesn't need to collect private information about you that they'd need if they want to take you to court for failure to pay.
(DIR) Post #A3NlLnobKyLjDsgeoK by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T03:07:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom They can verify good funds with visa. Transaction times are *terrible* with Bitcoin, meaning they either have to take *more* risk, or slow the flow, both resulting in higher costs to the merchants.And what *is* the plan for fraud? I buy something online and get a bad item, visa has me covered. What do I do if I paid with Bitcoin?
(DIR) Post #A3NlLvlLmwVDs7EAr2 by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:08:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom by itself, "fully digital" doesn't provide any benefit---we have debit cards, paypal, etc already. We also have trust-minimized assets (e.g. gold). What we didn't have before bitcoin was a trust-minimized asset that could be transferred over the Internet.
(DIR) Post #A3Nlt8iMeeXHb6fMYq by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:14:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom Visa allows chargebacks up to several months after a transaction, as you note. That's a way merchants commonly lose money and it's why they often want additional info about their customers.Payments with Bitcoin can be quite quick using Lightning Network. However, many purchases aren't instant, so the times don't matter much for those (e.g. if you buy a physical product from an online merchant, they usually don't ship it for a few hours).(Will reply about fraud separately.)
(DIR) Post #A3NmPpOFWVqzDhqQ7s by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:19:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom re: fraud, Bitcoin supports escrow transactions where seller Alice agrees to allow buyer Bob to send his money to an address that requires either both Alice and Bob to agree on where the funds go (either to Alice if Bob's happy or back to Bob if Alice's wants to give a refund), or which require an arbitrator both Alice and Bob agreed on in advance, Charlie, to agree with either Alice or Bob.(These txes aren't theoretical---my sister used one once when selling a $5k item.)
(DIR) Post #A3NmrmgFBwxwvMalH6 by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:24:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom for most stuff, people don't seem to really care about payment-level anti-fraud. They check the seller's reputation in advance, and if the seller is in the same area, they have the ability to sue if things go terribly wrong. In short, it's the opposite of the current system where chargebacks are easy and the seller needs to sue the buyer to recover from fraudulent claims of impropriety.
(DIR) Post #A3Nmslh4LUs49aRmWu by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T03:25:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom Thus re-introducing a whole layer of trust, with no built-in expectations about timeliness or resolution.
(DIR) Post #A3NnBEKId1zqAXbGVM by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:28:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom it's opt-in trust, and expectations about timeliness and resolution can be specified in the contract with the arbitrator.
(DIR) Post #A3NnGqICtl69MpIVYe by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T03:29:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom Right. So not something the network provides. Lack of established rules is a clear step backwards.
(DIR) Post #A3Nnh6VdEDALBu6DVQ by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:34:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom it's not a lack of established rules; the default rule, which the overwhelming majority of Bitcoin transactions use, is that there are no refunds unless the seller voluntarily offers it or you sue them outside of the payment system. If you want more, you can request that.Visa's way means sellers lose money to "friendly fraud" buyers. Bitcoin's (default) way means buyers lose money to fraudulent sellers. Like other things we've discussed in this thread, this is a tradeoff.
(DIR) Post #A3No0D1pDKQgucGe48 by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T03:37:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom Itâs lack of established rules for handling fraud/chargebacks/&c.Yes, Bitcoin âjustâ inverts the default risk... but thatâs bad! While you can certainly have bad actors in both sides, visaâs rules (shockingly) favor the party less likely to be on the weightier side of that power dynamic, whereas bitcoinâs favor those more likely to be more powerful. Thatâs a loss.
(DIR) Post #A3NoSC3ERPSfzPGldY by harding@hash.social
2021-01-19T03:42:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@a @fribbledom ok, we disagree on what "established rules" mean.Your power dynamic argument makes sense, but remember that eliminating chargeback fraud also reduces merchant costs and so allows them to offer lower prices and collect less personally identifiable information about their customers. So it's a tradeoff that doesn't necessarily favor one system over the other.
(DIR) Post #A3O6vaJb6bpQod5ZMO by a@pdx.social
2021-01-19T07:09:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@harding @fribbledom Lower prices remain hypothetical, and I donât see any reason to expect it.Personal info is a bit misleading. Nobody I use a card in person with asks for more info today, and when online itâs.... tied to dealing with fraud, which Bitcoin doesnât address by default.
(DIR) Post #A3PIv5ZcDJp5vZiXOy by Janus@x0r.be
2021-01-19T16:35:06Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@fribbledom This makes little sense as the same energy usage is independent of the amount of transactions a block contains.Let's assume you make a Bitcoin transaction now, and you measure the work of the next block. Then measure again, without making a transaction. The work of those two blocks will be independent. The miner is getting paid even with no fee market.You can't just divide energy usage by transaction count.Another flaw: off-chain transactions are not considered.
(DIR) Post #A4EFxfjYZMrzk5ANdo by shane@austin.community
2021-01-18T04:45:53Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@fribbledom Yeah I don't get why BTC is still considered the gold standard. It's the slowest cryptocurrency out there. There are so many that are better in every way ... and more environmentally friendly.