So you could do the math and come up with the amount of energy it took to mine 60k worth of blockchain, someone do this curious how much energy it cost
Conversation
Do you mean $60k worth of ETH? Depends on when it was mined, how it was mined. Could have been mined by one guy with a pen and paper.
1
5
Idk give me an estimate 🤷
1
It takes the same amount of energy to power a $1 transaction as it does to power a $60k or $1m transaction.
1
5
But crypto art isn't just one transaction. How many bids do you think it takes to get an NFT auction to $60k? How about $1m?
1
These measurements are BS but it sounds like you’re mad about energy being so cheap that it’s affordable to use the blockchain at all. The transaction fee pays for the energy used to transfer, settle and maintain the ledger securely. The co2 comes from electricity production.
1
I don't dislike crypto, I have $700 in btc right now. I've owned for almost 7 years. I just think there's SO MUCH wrong with this current NFT implementation, from corruption to environmental damage to pyramid schemes to lack of value, we should put on the breaks until we fix it.
1
2
I keep hearing so much about "but mining doesn't have to use harmful methods" and "but ethereum is moving to proof of stake" but what's the reality of these situations? Why can't we pump the brakes until it IS pos, why can't people admit that a lot of mining rigs are harmful?
1
1
Why don’t we shut down the Internet until they Dyson sphere is ready? What do u to you care what people do with energy they bought or money they earned? Are we going to look at every watt or calorie spent and decide whether it was a good use of energy?
1
Gotcha, so the argument is that nothing matters anyway and we should all throw our hands up and not care about what we're doing. Look, I'm happy that you won the auction and I'm sure it'll be good press for your crypto app. The defeatest attitude doesn't negate anything I've said
1
1
I agree that a lot of people are going to get burnt on bad NFT investments. The environmental impact argument is a straw man, backed by BS apples-to-oranges stats that completely misunderstand how crypto works.
Yeah, I've got that it isn't a perfect translation. But surely it isn't non-zero? If it were just the eco, then it'd be more justifiable. But I just see too many flaws for this current implementation of NFT to be worthwhile or beneficial. I'll always be pushing for a better one.
2
I think we can agree that everything is non-zero. If we're going to compare though, let's make it apples-to-apples or there's nothing to talk about. There might be better ways to no NFTs. The system is constantly evolving. I'm sure the market will adopt improvements.