• Mikina@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    11 months ago

    700kWh per transaction? That’s absurd amount of power. That’s 70 EUR of energy per one transaction at current (EU) exchange price.

    Is there anyone here knowledgeable enough about this issue to say whether those numbers are correct, or just an overestimate? It feels wrong.

    • sushibowl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      The number varies a little bit (I’ve seen estimates 600-1200 kWh) but this is well within an order of magnitude of being correct. It’s the nature of the competitive mining network and the proof of work system: if you can spend more computing power (i.e. energy) than everyone else there are lucrative mining rewards to be had. At the same time adding more computing power to the network doesn’t add more transaction processing power, because mining difficulty is constantly adjusted to keep the speed more or less constant.

      This naturally leads to exorbitant power consumption per transaction. Note that most of this power is not being purchased at EU exchange prices (mining naturally moves to where electricity can be had for cheap to maximize profits).

      • Mikina@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        I just hope bitcoin will finally die. It’s literally just wasting absurd amount of energy, only to allow scammers to scam billions of dollars from victims, and regular people to steal from eachother by investing into it. I mean, if the only use of bitcoin by now is for speculation and investment, then it means that any dollar you made, you literally stole from someone else who will be left with useless bitcoin once it’s all over. There’s no value, and with the ledger getting bigger and bigger, and bitcoin more expensive to mine, it will eventually be worthless. And we all know it, so anyone who makes thousands of dollars, there’s someone who probably financially ruined himself by making a wrong and stupid investment at the wrong time.

        I hate crypto so much :D.

        • quackers@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          You can exchange it for goods and services in the same way as the dollar. Which is the goal of it in the first place. Disregarding the cost for the sake of this point, it functions in a similar way as the dollar, which you could argue is also just used for speculation, but it would be equally inaccurate. Then there is describing bitcoin as all of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, which is also incorrect. It’s an evolving technology, and the system bitcoin uses is legacy and expensive, and is currently being kept alive by being the first in the space, money interests wanting to keep it dominant because of investment and a horde of cultlike followers. However, in the ethereum ecosystem, transactions keep getting cheaper through layer 2 protocols and upgrades to the system. It uses proof of stake which is vastly cheaper. I think there certainly are valid arguments against cryprocurrency, but the stuff everyone keeps NPC copypasting is generally nonsense.

          • samwise@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            11 months ago

            You can exchange it for goods and services in the same way as the dollar. Which is the goal of it in the first place. Disregarding the cost for the sake of this point

            But you can’t disregard the cost. No big box retailer is going to start accepting BTC transactions at the point of sale. It takes too long, and is too resource intensive. So you’re essentially limited to secondary markets or person-to-person transactions where seconds in processing the transaction don’t count. Not to mention the volatility of the exchange rate. A business or a government aren’t going to accept that the currency they accepted today could potentially be worth half its value tomorrow. Without some sort of major catastrophic world event, something like that isn’t going to happen to the dollar. That kind of shit destabilizes entire economies and nations.

            There’s also the issue of reputation. Regardless of validity, cryptocurrency is seen as something used for criminal activity. If your local city government said they’d start accepting BTC for your water bill or trash bill, the majority of average folk are going to think “that stuff people buy drugs with on the Internet?”

            BTC has never been and will never be viable as a mass market currency system.

            • quackers@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I agree, BTC is awful. But I also think its just a starting point for something that has the potential to become much better.

          • Mikina@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            You are right I shouldn’t have equaled bitcoin with the rest of the crypto ecosystem. While most crypto is utter scam, it’s true that there have been some slight advances here and there, and there are coins that may be actually useful for some cases, mostly Monero and I suppose Ethereum. I’d still say that crypto has done more harm than good in the world, and I say that as someone who’s really focused at privacy, care about it a lot and have invested significant amount of time and effort into staying as private as possible.

            But it’s great that Ethereum managed to solve most of the issues with Bitcoin - unless I’m mistaken, it’s not really used for investment speculation, and if it managed to keep the energy requirements low, that’s good. But last time I remember researching about blockchain (it was few months, so feel free to correct me), isn’t it running into serious issues with ledger size, that makes it infeasible for long-term (decades) of use, without sacrificing some of it’s guarantees? Which is one of the main issues with blockchain tech in general, that I don’t think has been solved so far.

            • quackers@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              It’s a process. There certainly are a lot of scams, and correct regulations need to be in place. It is a tool used by people who do harm, though it is not the cause of harm. At the same time, it’s helped a lot of startups innovate in non-traditional ways, and i think a global and affordable currency that is not tied to the local currency has the potential to help a lot of people. Ethereum in theory should be more stable in terms of price as it keeps being minted and destroyed trough use of the blockchain. You can speculate with it, or the ERC-20 tokens in it’s ecosystem. Ledger size is an issue i’ve had to deal with myself setting up a node, but it’s also an issue that can be fixed in several ways if it looks like it could become a significant enough issue, as they did with PoW to PoS.

              I think it’s hard to measure what good and bad crypto is done when you only hear about outragous corruption and crime but not how the everyday person uses it. I use it in a way that helps myself and others and I’m no north korean drug lord scamming people.

    • Michal@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s incorrect. I would comparing to fuel consumption in a car based on how many times you turned. If you make more turns on your way, it would seem your car is more efficient, when in reality there’s very little relation between turns and fuel usage, just like there is little relation between number of blocks mined and transactions.

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s an overestimate. Right now the total cost per transaction is around 82 US dollars, which at current exchange rates is 75 Euros. That cost covers everything - electricity, rent for the building, salary for staff, taxes, depreciation of mining equipment, and whatever profit is required to keep the miners in business. I don’t know what proportion of miner costs actually goes to electricity but I expect it’ll likely be much less than 70 Euros.

      Perhaps someone got that 700 kWh figure by doing the reverse calculation - looking at how much a transaction cost and then assuming that all goes toward electricity.