this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
1507 points (95.0% liked)
Memes
44912 readers
2986 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I have questioned this ever since I learned that the more adoption there is, the less efficient mining becomes, ergo more power is wasted accomplishing the exact same task for no extra benefit. Difficulty creates a back asswards system that makes adoption a con.
Mining is only one strategy for concenous, but yes it is a pretty rudementary and inefficient version.
And even in mining there are different protocols, Bitcoin is just intentionally inefficient 🤷
Man, try to make maximalists understand that 🤣
My Excel spreadsheet remains efficiency champion!
Pretty sure there are more efficient databases than Excel for the kind of information stored on blockchains 🤪
Sure, but when even Excel is a more efficient database, that should say something about crypto.
My bad joke was that a real world cost is the point.
Well it’s been over a decade and Bitcoin is still PoW, as well as nearly 50% of the entire crypto market.
Ok... that doesn't make what they said any less true?
My point is how great can it be if over a decade later the terrible system for mining is still dominant? The more people participating, the worse it gets. We just had texas power companies paying crypto bros to stop mining it’s gotten so bad - and we aren’t even at .01% adoption yet.
You’re chiming in in a way that ignores nuance and implied meaning. I feel like my intention has been pretty clear but if I need to spell it out so be it.
That's more a question of being first on the scene and the financial impact if Bitcoin maximalists finally accepted that their blockchain is crap compared to other options, that's what keeps Bitcoin at the top, not how good or bad it is compared to the tech's potential...
And no your intention wasn't very clear otherwise I wouldn't have had to reply how I did previously.
I don't know why you're arguing about Bitcoin being PoW and how bad it is, in think I made it pretty clear that I agree with that...
As I mentioned in another comment, blockchains could replace the stock market and actually improve it. Some chains have transactions that are quick enough that it would be perfectly fine for it (except for automated trading systems, but fuck ATS), transactions would be publically visible instead of the mess that's happening now, no more T+2 delay for the transactions to settle... But crypto is fighting tooth and nail not to be recognized as a security when it's probably the only thing it could be good as... 🙄
Otherwise, as you said, blockchains are a solution in search of a problem to solve 🤷
Doesn't need to be using PoW though.
It would improve the stock market by bringing transparency. Right now you've got transactions happening off market so as to not affect the price of stocks by creating a huge spike in demand and the only way you'll know something happened is by paying to have access to level 2 data or by trying to cross reference the big moves that need to be declared by major investors.
Not all blockchains need to me anonymous either, one used for that purpose could be centralized with users needing to be registered with the authority that has control over the chain.
Bitcoin is more religion and cult than anything. Of course they think it's great or at least able to hand wave criticisms.
And yeah, consensus is a hard problem to solve for. Many have taken the route of least resistance and implemented what is known to work.
Ethereum doesn't use mining at all anymore. It can get expensive to use though, which layer 2 chains help with
It allows you to send money overseas very cheap. If you moved to a different country, cryptocurrency saves you a lot of headaches with exchange rates and bank fees.
It also allows you to lock down money into a program and distribute it systematically without anyone being able to touch it. Think mass donations being automatically distributed to a select number of organizations, but instead of trusting that the fundraiser doesn't pocket any money for themselves, you make it impossible for them to do so.
It also doesn't run as a company so it needs no offices, no employees or bosses, so theoretically it is more cost effective than traditional banking. In a way it is like the fediverse where instead of relying on one big bank service, many people host their own ones, and just like the fediverse, you have some hosts that you can trust and some that you can't, and while it is more expensive to keep track of multiple instances, that simply is the cost of decentralization.
You're not really supposed to earn money with crypto (unless you host a node), just spend it or use as your own private bank.