Funny how people will believe anything they here. 
Topic: Extreme waste of electricity (Read 2881 times)
Funny how people will believe anything they here. The so called waste is what makes BitCoin so secure. It may seem evil but its necessary.
There are ways to reduce the cost but that also decreases security.
There are ways to reduce the cost but that also decreases security.
Illogical.
Wouldn't it be better if just made 1,000,000 Block Erupters and a special hash algorithm that only those limited number of hardware devices could do. Distribute those 1M devices and let that be the entire hash pool.
The amount of energy that 1 million block erupters would consume is not all that much less then the amount of electricity that the entire network uses now. Block Erupters are very inefficient in terms of electric usage per number of hashes per second, while the most efficient miners on the market are much more efficient.
For example block erupters only can achieve a hashrate of roughly .333 GH/s but consume ~23 w per hour. This means they have an efficiency of roughly 69 watts per GHs per hour. On the other hand bitmain's S5 can achieve roughly .51 watts per Ghs per hour. This means that using one S5 will be able to consume less then 1% of the amount of electricity of a number of block erupters that produce a similar hashrate.
in short
the amount of electric use for bitcoin is far less then the electric used in las vegas (poker chip currency)
in short
the amount of electric use for bitcoin is far less then just the 6 main buildings of wallstreet (only a small part of the whole fiat currency)
now add all that up with all the card processing offices, the call centres of banks, the local branches of banks, the mint that prints fiat, the trucks that transport fiat. and multiply it by the thousands of locations around the world..
.. then realize bitcoin is cheap
the amount of electric use for bitcoin is far less then the electric used in las vegas (poker chip currency)
in short
the amount of electric use for bitcoin is far less then just the 6 main buildings of wallstreet (only a small part of the whole fiat currency)
now add all that up with all the card processing offices, the call centres of banks, the local branches of banks, the mint that prints fiat, the trucks that transport fiat. and multiply it by the thousands of locations around the world..
.. then realize bitcoin is cheap
We must vote for the canditate who builds more coal plants to make electricity cheaper for the miners 
The so called waste is what makes BitCoin so secure. It may seem evil but its necessary.
There are ways to reduce the cost but that also decreases security.
There are ways to reduce the cost but that also decreases security.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
hashing power went way out of control, now the bitcoin community is sending over $10 dollars/day (in fiat no less) to power companies all over the world. That money doesn't come from nowhere - it is real money lost by the community. We've got to find an end to wasteful hashing.
The plan from the beginning was to gradually move over from the block reward paying for security to tx fees paying for security just like with PoS. This is part of the process with the scalability roadmap where block we will go from 2-7 tps up to 140 tps and thus bring in up to ~2520 usd in tx fees to cover securing the blockchain. PoS algos will temporarily remain more efficient because of this transition process but bitcoin has the benefit of better security and a fairer distribution based upon risk and effort and not simply stake. Eventually, economic pressures from the costs of electricity should force miners to both centralize and decentralize at the same time. You should expect to see very specialized mining farms using cheap renewable energy and recapturing heat energy to produce goods or services. On the other end you should also see decentralization occurring to allow individuals who heat anything to do so with mining to save money instead of just heating up filaments.
The distribution/issuance is one thing, the security model is another.
Would be possible to have PoW coin with very quick distribution,
and PoS coin with many block rewards.
The poS fans will say 'look how efficient we are' but the trade off
is how unfair the distribution is. Bitcoin's hundred+ year distribution
gives many chances to all, for example right now the price
is cheap compared to where it may be after the next block subsidy halving.
I really liked that article 'long live Pow, long live mining' because
it explains why you cannot gain any extra efficiency simply by
moving to a new security model while keeping the same distribution,
(because of competition and economic rent.)
Wouldn't it be better if just made 1,000,000 Block Erupters and a special hash algorithm that only those limited number of hardware devices could do. Distribute those 1M devices and let that be the entire hash pool.
hashing power went way out of control, now the bitcoin community is sending over $10 dollars/day (in fiat no less) to power companies all over the world. That money doesn't come from nowhere - it is real money lost by the community. We've got to find an end to wasteful hashing.
hashing power went way out of control, now the bitcoin community is sending over $10 dollars/day (in fiat no less) to power companies all over the world. That money doesn't come from nowhere - it is real money lost by the community. We've got to find an end to wasteful hashing.
There is much more waste all over society bitcoin is the least of your worries. This is where we are at with humanity, if everyone could join forces it would be easy.
Please....no.
Let's say you have 1 million block eruptors. Each has a private key deep (not reverse engineerable) in hardware. These are the only devices permitted to mine - as they have to sign in with their signature.
Now, sell the 1 million devices in an auction. Money goes to the board who uses it wisely (OK - queue the jokes here). These 1 million block eruptors don't consume so much energy. Yet, they are very distributed hashing (i.e. no 51% attack possible). They can be bought and sold to achieve redistribution. No other 'fake' devices can join the network. Miners could still 'vote' for a preferred protocol by running whatever version they like.
Isn't that better?
Now, sell the 1 million devices in an auction. Money goes to the board who uses it wisely (OK - queue the jokes here). These 1 million block eruptors don't consume so much energy. Yet, they are very distributed hashing (i.e. no 51% attack possible). They can be bought and sold to achieve redistribution. No other 'fake' devices can join the network. Miners could still 'vote' for a preferred protocol by running whatever version they like.
Isn't that better?
In the future, mining farms will move to areas like Iceland where electricity can be cheaply generated.
The market will find the most efficient method.
The market will find the most efficient method.
There is no 'special hash algorithm' that can only be performed by a certain number of devices. What happens when someone makes another million of these devices and has control over the network? Even if the algorithm was closed source what prevents reverse engineering, or those involved from cheating. You would have a trustless decentralized network which was completely centralized and requires eternal trust in those who set it up. I think I would pass.
This is correct
Legitimate question
Alot of people disregard Proof-of-stake as insecure, but has this been proven? I have not heard of any POS coins getting hacked via their onsensus algorithm. What about DPOS? Why do people think it's insecure?
Alot of people disregard Proof-of-stake as insecure, but has this been proven? I have not heard of any POS coins getting hacked via their onsensus algorithm. What about DPOS? Why do people think it's insecure?
Because PoW zealots spread FUD about PoS trying to keep Bitcoin popular.
There's got to be a better reason....
Legitimate question
Alot of people disregard Proof-of-stake as insecure, but has this been proven? I have not heard of any POS coins getting hacked via their onsensus algorithm. What about DPOS? Why do people think it's insecure?
Alot of people disregard Proof-of-stake as insecure, but has this been proven? I have not heard of any POS coins getting hacked via their onsensus algorithm. What about DPOS? Why do people think it's insecure?
Because PoW zealots spread FUD about PoS trying to keep Bitcoin popular.
Legitimate question
Alot of people disregard Proof-of-stake as insecure, but has this been proven? I have not heard of any POS coins getting hacked via their onsensus algorithm. What about DPOS? Why do people think it's insecure?
Alot of people disregard Proof-of-stake as insecure, but has this been proven? I have not heard of any POS coins getting hacked via their onsensus algorithm. What about DPOS? Why do people think it's insecure?
Wouldn't it be better if just made 1,000,000 Block Erupters and a special hash algorithm that only those limited number of hardware devices could do. Distribute those 1M devices and let that be the entire hash pool.
hashing power went way out of control, now the bitcoin community is sending over $10 dollars/day (in fiat no less) to power companies all over the world. That money doesn't come from nowhere - it is real money lost by the community. We've got to find an end to wasteful hashing.
hashing power went way out of control, now the bitcoin community is sending over $10 dollars/day (in fiat no less) to power companies all over the world. That money doesn't come from nowhere - it is real money lost by the community. We've got to find an end to wasteful hashing.
The idea of a proof-of-work algorithm is is that there's no way of forging the work. What you're suggesting could be circumvented by people copying the hardware - how would you stop them?
now the bitcoin community is sending over $10 dollars/day (in fiat no less) to power companies all over the world.
Holy hell, I had no idea it was that bad! That's like, over $300 a month!!! Enough to power one home in the Summer! Oh the humanity!
There are worse ways to waste electricity.
So a variation of PoS most closely defined as a TaPoS variation thus refuting your previous comment of not talking about PoS.
I bet you don't understand how SuperNET is protected against Sybil attacks. If you did you wouldn't write this nonsense.
Jump to: