6 ms·

Lol power usage is such a strawman argument. 1% of all electricity in USA is used watching Netflix but you don't hear people complaining. But running a global p

Lol power usage is such a strawman argument. 1% of all electricity in USA is used watching Netflix but you don't hear people complaining. But running a global permissionless decentralised store of value currency network should supposedly be "super cheap" or it's an environmental disaster and must be stopped.

kibwen 3y ago
The reason that bitcoin's energy usage is a philosophical nightmare is because it's a system where energy consumption is the product. As opposed to industries which are "merely" energy-intensive, let's take aluminum refining for example, spending more energy to refine aluminum does not create more demand for aluminum, but spending more energy on bitcoin increases the price of bitcoin, which induces more demand, which increases the price, which incentivizes mining, which costs more energy, and so on in a vicious cycle. Proof of work is a problem; it's conspicuous consumption on a hyper-industrial scale, and it's coming at the absolute worst time in human history for us to be wasting energy, let alone to be inventing the optimal machine for wasting energy at an increasing rate.
- TapWaterBandit 3y ago
  Proof of Work is an energy-intensive solution to a very deep and old social problem: how do you verify transactions between parties over a great distance/online without a trusted intermediary? Proof of work is enormously socially valuable and will change the world. Bitcoin may not be the PoW application to do it (although it also might be) but proof of work is here to stay because of the huge advantages it has over the existing system where individuals/institutions insert themselves between transactions to their own profit. RE energy, not here to argue philosophy. Just going to point out that if that is your concern luckily the world is going over to renewables so that particular objection will be gone soon anyway.
  - kibwen 3y ago
    > Just going to point out that if that is your concern luckily the world is going over to renewables so that particular objection will be gone soon anyway. This is dangerously missing the peril of the current situation. The problem with our current energy makeup is not "there's not enough renewables". The problem with our current energy makeup is "there are too many carbon emissions". As a first-order effect, it does not matter how many renewables we bring online. What matters is taking fossil fuels offline. It does not matter if renewables make up an ever-increasing percentage of an increasing energy market, because the problem is not the relative market share of fossil fuels, it is the absolute amount of emissions, which is already more than our planet can handle. And the increasing demand for energy makes taking fossil fuel plants offline less viable than it otherwise would be, and bitcoin is a nontrivial component of that and it threatens to grow at an exponential pace, which makes it an existential threat to mankind. Please trust me when I say that I do not give a damn about the price of bitcoin. What I care about is stopping runaway energy consumption, and from that perspective proof-of-work is the biggest existential threat to humanity since the atom bomb.
    - TapWaterBandit 3y ago
      > Please trust me when I say that I do not give a damn about the price of bitcoin. What I care about is stopping runaway energy consumption, and from that perspective proof-of-work is the biggest existential threat to humanity since the atom bomb. Mate, this is ridiculous. Global energy usage was 179000 Twh (terawatt hours) in 2022. (https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption) Bitcoin energy usage was at its highest in 2022 at 200 Twh. (https://www.statista.com/statistics/881472/worldwide-bitcoin-energy-consumption/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/881472/worldwide-bitcoin...) So 200/179000 * 100 = 0.11% Bitcoin energy usage accounted for 0.11% of global energy usage and you think it is the biggest threat to humanity since the A-Bomb? Bitcoin is entirely irrelevant to the grand scheme of things re climate emissions. So you are wrong on this point: > bitcoin is a nontrivial component of that and it threatens to grow at an exponential pace Bitcoin IS a trivial component of overall emissions and even with an insane ramp up would not be close to being the biggest issue re emissions.
  - npoc 3y ago
    All sound money has been proof of work since the start of time. It is fundamental to a lasting and fair monetary system. We currently have a fiat system where the population have to work for it, while the elite can effortlessly print it, becoming ever more unjustly powerful as a result. They are looting the world. Even today, gold miners are working to dig up their proof of work which they can sell into the market. If the work they did was worth more than the gold they found, they'd stop. And if was worth less, more miners would mine, increasing the supply and devaluing the gold. The only difference with bitcoin is that the work is abstracted. It's simply anchoring the creation of a digital token to work in the physical domain. At the same time, the work performed is protecting the network from attack - it's what makes the blockchain immutable. The work is not wasted - it is being stored as "walls" on top of each block. The further down the block chain you go the more walls of protection you would have to break. It's breathtakingly beautiful.
- npoc 3y ago
  The main problem here is that you're looking at the energy use as a waste. It's absolutely not, but in order to understand why, you need to understand what's wrong with the current monetary system and the terrible effects it is having on the world. You're also missing that bitcoin's game theory means that it will ultimately only use unwanted/wasted energy. Bitcoin miners can mine anywhere in the world and those trying to use energy that's in demand by the general population won't be economical.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    > but in order to understand why, you need to understand what's wrong with the current monetary system and the terrible effects it is having on the world. Are we about to find out why, or do I have to pay for your memoir to understand? I've been dying to hear you expand on this for a while now.
    - olalonde 3y ago
      https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ is a good starting point.
  - guappa 3y ago
    > The main problem here is that you're looking at the energy use as a waste. It's absolutely not It is. Mining is literally bruteforcing…
    - npoc 3y ago
      It's an abstraction of work. All sound money requires equivalent value work to produce. And the work done is stored as protective "walls" in the blockchain, one on top of each block, piled higher and higher as time goes on, to become impenetrable. It's quite beautiful.
      - guappa 3y ago
        It's literally doing busywork just to assign a value to the mining. It's beautiful if you're a business major who has no regard to real world.

kibwen 3y ago

The reason that bitcoin's energy usage is a philosophical nightmare is because it's a system where energy consumption is the product. As opposed to industries which are "merely" energy-intensive, let's take aluminum refining for example, spending more energy to refine aluminum does not create more demand for aluminum, but spending more energy on bitcoin increases the price of bitcoin, which induces more demand, which increases the price, which incentivizes mining, which costs more energy, and so on in a vicious cycle. Proof of work is a problem; it's conspicuous consumption on a hyper-industrial scale, and it's coming at the absolute worst time in human history for us to be wasting energy, let alone to be inventing the optimal machine for wasting energy at an increasing rate.

TapWaterBandit 3y ago
Proof of Work is an energy-intensive solution to a very deep and old social problem: how do you verify transactions between parties over a great distance/online without a trusted intermediary? Proof of work is enormously socially valuable and will change the world. Bitcoin may not be the PoW application to do it (although it also might be) but proof of work is here to stay because of the huge advantages it has over the existing system where individuals/institutions insert themselves between transactions to their own profit. RE energy, not here to argue philosophy. Just going to point out that if that is your concern luckily the world is going over to renewables so that particular objection will be gone soon anyway.
- kibwen 3y ago
  > Just going to point out that if that is your concern luckily the world is going over to renewables so that particular objection will be gone soon anyway. This is dangerously missing the peril of the current situation. The problem with our current energy makeup is not "there's not enough renewables". The problem with our current energy makeup is "there are too many carbon emissions". As a first-order effect, it does not matter how many renewables we bring online. What matters is taking fossil fuels offline. It does not matter if renewables make up an ever-increasing percentage of an increasing energy market, because the problem is not the relative market share of fossil fuels, it is the absolute amount of emissions, which is already more than our planet can handle. And the increasing demand for energy makes taking fossil fuel plants offline less viable than it otherwise would be, and bitcoin is a nontrivial component of that and it threatens to grow at an exponential pace, which makes it an existential threat to mankind. Please trust me when I say that I do not give a damn about the price of bitcoin. What I care about is stopping runaway energy consumption, and from that perspective proof-of-work is the biggest existential threat to humanity since the atom bomb.
  - TapWaterBandit 3y ago
    > Please trust me when I say that I do not give a damn about the price of bitcoin. What I care about is stopping runaway energy consumption, and from that perspective proof-of-work is the biggest existential threat to humanity since the atom bomb. Mate, this is ridiculous. Global energy usage was 179000 Twh (terawatt hours) in 2022. (https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption) Bitcoin energy usage was at its highest in 2022 at 200 Twh. (https://www.statista.com/statistics/881472/worldwide-bitcoin-energy-consumption/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/881472/worldwide-bitcoin...) So 200/179000 * 100 = 0.11% Bitcoin energy usage accounted for 0.11% of global energy usage and you think it is the biggest threat to humanity since the A-Bomb? Bitcoin is entirely irrelevant to the grand scheme of things re climate emissions. So you are wrong on this point: > bitcoin is a nontrivial component of that and it threatens to grow at an exponential pace Bitcoin IS a trivial component of overall emissions and even with an insane ramp up would not be close to being the biggest issue re emissions.
- npoc 3y ago
  All sound money has been proof of work since the start of time. It is fundamental to a lasting and fair monetary system. We currently have a fiat system where the population have to work for it, while the elite can effortlessly print it, becoming ever more unjustly powerful as a result. They are looting the world. Even today, gold miners are working to dig up their proof of work which they can sell into the market. If the work they did was worth more than the gold they found, they'd stop. And if was worth less, more miners would mine, increasing the supply and devaluing the gold. The only difference with bitcoin is that the work is abstracted. It's simply anchoring the creation of a digital token to work in the physical domain. At the same time, the work performed is protecting the network from attack - it's what makes the blockchain immutable. The work is not wasted - it is being stored as "walls" on top of each block. The further down the block chain you go the more walls of protection you would have to break. It's breathtakingly beautiful.
npoc 3y ago
The main problem here is that you're looking at the energy use as a waste. It's absolutely not, but in order to understand why, you need to understand what's wrong with the current monetary system and the terrible effects it is having on the world. You're also missing that bitcoin's game theory means that it will ultimately only use unwanted/wasted energy. Bitcoin miners can mine anywhere in the world and those trying to use energy that's in demand by the general population won't be economical.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > but in order to understand why, you need to understand what's wrong with the current monetary system and the terrible effects it is having on the world. Are we about to find out why, or do I have to pay for your memoir to understand? I've been dying to hear you expand on this for a while now.
  - olalonde 3y ago
    https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ is a good starting point.
- guappa 3y ago
  > The main problem here is that you're looking at the energy use as a waste. It's absolutely not It is. Mining is literally bruteforcing…
  - npoc 3y ago
    It's an abstraction of work. All sound money requires equivalent value work to produce. And the work done is stored as protective "walls" in the blockchain, one on top of each block, piled higher and higher as time goes on, to become impenetrable. It's quite beautiful.
    - guappa 3y ago
      It's literally doing busywork just to assign a value to the mining. It's beautiful if you're a business major who has no regard to real world.