• HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 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
        ·
        9 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
        ·
        9 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
          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@kolektiva.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 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
              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@kolektiva.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 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
                  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@kolektiva.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    9 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.