• HACKthePRISONS
    link
    fedilink
    -19 months ago

    there is every reason to not believe them. they clearly have a motivation to paint power consumption as worse than is true, and the complexity of extracting the use of dogecoin mining from the rest of the mergedmine is, personally, unfathomable. maybe i’m dumb and there is a simple calculation that can be done, but without evidence of their methodology, i’m not going to believe them, and no one should.

    • Eager Eagle
      link
      fedilink
      English
      49 months ago

      what’s the problem of estimating based on mined blocks and difficulty?

      • HACKthePRISONS
        link
        fedilink
        09 months ago

        it’s a bit like clocking your gas mileage to and from work, and then saying thats how much gas it took you to get out of your driveway.

      • HACKthePRISONS
        link
        fedilink
        09 months ago

        not everyone is merge-mining and even those who do may only be merge-mining specific chains.

      • HACKthePRISONS
        link
        fedilink
        -19 months ago

        the work that goes into mining those blocks should be discounted by the amount of energy that goes into mining every other merge-mined chain

        • Eager Eagle
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          ok, so either ~1% figure already discounts this energy due to merge-mining, or it doesn’t discount and the effective energy consumption of Doge is lower. The original point remains: Bitcoin is pretty much the energetic problem of crypto, .

          • HACKthePRISONS
            link
            fedilink
            09 months ago

            asic miners are the problem with crypto’s energy consumption. nothing is wrong the the bitcoin protocol, which is functioning as expected.

            • Eager Eagle
              link
              fedilink
              English
              3
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              it’s just that PoW is trash when applied at scale for encouraging energy use to create consensus - and that’s by design - so indeed, “there’s something wrong with the protocol”.

              • HACKthePRISONS
                link
                fedilink
                09 months ago

                you seem to understand that the protocol can function without the massive power use but you seem to want to blame the protocol for the power use.

                at this point, we have to agree to disagree.

                have a nice day

                • Eager Eagle
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  the protocol can function without the massive power use

                  At scale no, it can’t and that’ll never be the case because at any given time, someone will be willing to put more energy (work) into it to gain an advantage - so as long as there’s demand for that coin, PoW will always demand huge amounts of energy.

                  And yes, I do blame the consensus protocol because ultimately that’s the culprit of causing this incentive to waste energy and targeting miners or any other actors is an utter waste of time.

                  • HACKthePRISONS
                    link
                    fedilink
                    19 months ago

                    > at any given time, someone will be willing to put more energy (work) into it to gain an advantage

                    that’s not a problem with the protocol. that’s a problem with people. that’s like saying that houses are a problem because people rent them to exploit the working class. the problem isn’t the house, it’s the people who try to buy all the houses.