• Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    then there’s no reason to believe they got it wrong.

    also they’re vague estimates, even bitcoin has a huge margin for error.

    • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 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.

        • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 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@kolektiva.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 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@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            5 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@kolektiva.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 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@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                5 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@kolektiva.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 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@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 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.