[shreder]

Bitcoin hashrate drops over 30% aka loses 30% of it's security overnight.

In order for Proof of Work to guarantee any security, no dishonest or censoring miner can control more than 51% of the hashrate.  If we want Bitcoin to be resilient to government attack, Bitcoin miners should be able to survive something as extreme as an airstrike.

Meanwhile, Ethereum has maintained about 99.99% participation aka no drop in validators going offline for ANY reason. This is the difference between a network that is resilient to ANY attack and one that is vulnerable like Bitcoin which drops off 30% of its security because of some cold temperatures.

[shreder]

Yeah, it's called "variance":





The difference between Bitcoin and Ethereum is that Bitcoin is decentralized. You don't have to trust a third party not to steal or counterfeit coins.

It's actually called "fragility", a network that can't even survive the cold would be shut down by governments easily.

The difference between Bitcoin and Ethereum is that Ethereum is decentralized. You don't have to trust a third party not to attack the network with your own hash power, as you cannot solo mine profitably.

Have fun with your "variance" as the network loses over 30% of it's security overnight. One of these days it's "variance" will dip low enough for an attack.

[Kaleb]

Why the would someone stop doing something that generates heat because of cold temperatures. Seems like it's more a power consumption and power grid problem than it is cold temperatures, might as well narrow your attack in on the actual cons.

[Omniscient]

I don't like any Proof-of-Work crypto's. They are so bad for the planet. Don't really care for this news because of that.

When you repeat something you don't understand you're a parrot. You can be a parrot or you can be a free thinker and do the research yourself.

[Omniscient]

Why the would someone stop doing something that generates heat because of cold temperatures. Seems like it's more a power consumption and power grid problem than it is cold temperatures, might as well narrow your attack in on the actual cons.

Power grids are actually getting knocked offline. Also some places might request that miners pause during a storm to avoid overload. Just like hurricanes, winter storms can cause havoc. I've lived in places with immense winter storms. It can cripple a region for days.

[shreder]

Why the would someone stop doing something that generates heat because of cold temperatures. Seems like it's more a power consumption and power grid problem than it is cold temperatures, might as well narrow your attack in on the actual cons.

That's even worse miners rely on government built and controlled power grid infrastructure.

I could careless about the environment. But if you cannot have a resilient network that does not rely on centralized third party built and controlled infrastructure get out of the p2p ecurrency sphere because you are obsolete and vulnerable to attacks.

My ETH validator running on consumer hardware in my living room has 99.99% uptime. Easily powered by solar at 15watts. No one mines for reason, YOU CANT.

[shreder]

I did. What's the counter-argument?

They don't like when you don't parrot mimic and repeat after them to their own narrative.

Miners went offline due to government built and controlled infrastructure could not support their security ineffective and vulnerable machines. They want you to believe that it's a good thing.

[Omniscient]

I did. What's the counter-argument?

Here is a clue. Green energy is EXPENSIVE. If you're not gonna even bother to try, I'll just consider you a parrot.

[shreder]

Fact of the matter is that 30% of the Bitcoin network went offline because of a government built, regulated, and controlled infrastructure could not support their vulnerable and ineffectively network security machines.

Meanwhile Ethereum network is at 99.99% effectiveness with essentially no validators offline due to the inefficiencies of centralized third parties.

Self reliant, resilient and secure. THIS IS ETHEREUM DONT FUCK WITH THE KING.

[shreder]

In PoS you'd need 51% of the coins though, instead of hashrate.

Ofcourse there will be power consumption with any crypto, but bitcoin is like a car running on coal. Great invention. But can be much better, just like cars evolved.


I'm not talking about using green energy. I would just like to see overall consumption of electricity decrease. Electricity is still produced on demand. And prices are going up and up regardless of where it comes from.

66% not 51% which makes it even more secure. Not to mention the coins tie you to the network any attack will mean shooting yourself in the foot.

ASICs are not tied to any social consensus. Miners could easily attack BTC then go to BCH crowning that next shit PoW network King.

[shreder]

All false information. No matter the lies you try to convince yourself to believe.

BTC lost 30% of its security overnight while Ethereum has thousands fold more security with 99.99% network online.

[shreder]

It's so ridiculous how privileged we are.

This idea that "power consumption is bad" is such a bad take. Most of us live in a country where people put up holiday decorations that consume energy, and have PC owners with 1000 watts power supply for the sole purpose of playing video games with high end GPUs.

Energy sourcing vs energy consumption.

You are missing the point. Bitcoin heavily relies on a government regulated, built, and controlled electrical infrastructure. You can hook up your 1000 gigawatt warehouse to a $50 solar panel like ETH validators can.

We can argue all day but fact of the matter is BTC -30% network security overnight while ETH 99.99% validators online.

[Omniscient]

I'm not talking about using green energy. I would just like to see overall consumption of electricity decrease. Electricity is still produced on demand. And prices are going up and up regardless of where it comes from.

So then stop using Air Conditioning which accounts for 10% of all global energy consumption. AC is actually not mandatory, it's simply a comfort thing. You could open the window and use a fan. I did it for most of my childhood and to be honest if it wasn't for my family, I probably still wouldn't bother with AC.

People bitch and moan about shit they don't even put into perspective or investigate. Bitcoin is the only real way that Green Energy is going to get paid for. Currently BTC is 1% of all global energy consumption but weight that 1% against that it could be the path to a global reserve currency that's under no government control and it's a huge win.

Anyone parroting about Bitcoin and the energy consumption being bad for the planet has simply read headlines and didn't bother to actually do any research at all into it.

Maybe start by watching a few of this guys videos about Bitcoin Energy Consumption.

[Swip3r]

I feel like the majority of arguments in this thread versus curtailment and Bitcoins energy use could be demolished by this single website with multiple different sources - https://endthefud.org/

Curtailment is necessary, and does a net positive for the grid.
Bitcoin miners take advantage of cheap excess power when its available on the grid, and when the grid is in peak demand, we power off.
We're not "creating" new energy because of Bitcoin miners (in general before someone links me a few coal power plants coming back to life, that's a whole separate issue regarding green energy not being viable, yet.)
we simply use excess energy that otherwise would not be used, and that usually means more grid stability AND cheaper power for some people.

When supply of energy is higher than demand, we take advantage.
When demand is higher than supply, we power down.. What is the issue?

[shreder]

I feel like the majority of arguments in this thread versus curtailment and Bitcoins energy use could be demolished by this single website with multiple different sources - https://endthefud.org/

Curtailment is necessary, and does a net positive for the grid.
Bitcoin miners take advantage of cheap excess power when its available on the grid, and when the grid is in peak demand, we power off.
We're not "creating" new energy because of Bitcoin miners (in general before someone links me a few coal power plants coming back to life, that's a whole separate issue regarding green energy not being viable, yet.)
we simply use excess energy that otherwise would not be used, and that usually means more grid stability AND cheaper power for some people.

When supply of energy is higher than demand, we take advantage.
When demand is higher than supply, we power down.. What is the issue?

Because security should remain high. Imagine going from 250m TH/s to 150m TH/s because it's too "cold" or not in "demand".

ETH does not suffer this demand/supply flaw. ETH security always at an maximum, I have no reason to EVER power down my validator. This differentiates a secure and resilient network from a fragile network like Bitcoin.