i should be smarter than to argue with bitcoin maximalists about the energy intensity of bitcoin, but seriously, technologists, the industry has a problem with energy usage *even at this scale*. if it 'actually' scaled to replace everything it would be catastrophic.
-
-
alright, let me tease apart a couple things what I'm saying is that energy / transaction isn't a useful figure transaction rate is a design choice, BTC is about 320gb, in ten years that doubles you can run a full validating node on a rasPI with a cable modem /
-
contrast this to Ethereum, which is practically centralized because of validation requirements energy use scales with value, because more value means it's worth more money to mine a block that's how proof of waste works: it's *expensive* to rewrite the chain
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah, that's a pretty decent steelman. Regarding the blocksize, we had a bit of a multiyear dispute about whether Bitcoin needs more transactions on the base layer or not. The folks that thought all transactions should go in the base-layer spun off and now work on "Bitcoin Cash".
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
