chriswilmer

7 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by chriswilmer 5y ago

   You are correct! The other person is wrong. Transaction volume has almost zero relationship with mining energy usage (there are some very subtle connections, but those nuances are hardly worth getting into for this discussion).
2. 2.▲
   by chriswilmer 9y ago

   This is a stupid comparison. The number of transactions can be increased by a factor of a 1000 easily while holding the amount of energy expended constant.
3. 3.▲
   by chriswilmer 10y ago

   Oh weird, this exact comment was also posted on reddit (r/business) What's going on?
4. 4.▲
   Will the real Satoshi please stand up? (funny)(thisweekintomorrow.com)

   1 points by chriswilmer 10y ago|0 comments
5. 5.▲
   Introducing Ledger, the First Bitcoin-Only Academic Journal(motherboard.vice.com)

   1 points by chriswilmer 11y ago|0 comments
6. 6.▲
   A Transaction Fee Market Exists Without a Block Size Limit [pdf](dl.dropboxusercontent.com)

   1 points by chriswilmer 11y ago|0 comments
7. 7.▲
   by chriswilmer 11y ago

   I don't think the diameter of a DNA strand is 2.5nm...
8. 8.▲
   by chriswilmer 13y ago

   Befuddles eh? I'll just leave this here... http://www.befuddled.org/
9. 9.▲
   by chriswilmer 13y ago

   Co-author writing here. Although we think Bitcoin has (probably) a bright future, the book is really just about explaining how it works (the protocol and the cryptography behind it).