Transaction Costs and Tethers: Why I’m a Crypto Skeptic

Re:Transaction Costs and Tethers: Why I’m a Crypto Skeptic by darawk on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @05:50PM (#17657549)

> LN doesn't really solve the energy problem because the incentive for miners to compete is still dominated by the mining reward rather than transaction costs.

You're right, it doesn't solve the energy problem. LN solves the fee problem. The energy problem is addressed by something like proof of stake.

> Proof of stake is interesting but I don't think it's been used at scale yet has it?

It's been used in a number of non-major cryptocurrencies. Its been analyzed quite a bit though, and there are high-value (in the sense of market cap - i.e. large bounty for someone to exploit it, if it were possible) working implementations out there.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Transaction Costs and Tethers: Why I’m a Crypto Skeptic by jmull on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @09:34PM (#17658936)

You haven't solved the fee problem if you haven't solved the energy problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Transaction Costs and Tethers: Why I’m a Crypto Skeptic by darawk on Wednesday August 01, 2018 @03:31PM (#17666121)

I'm not sure what your reasoning here is, but you're wrong. LN basically allows you to dramatically expand the number of transactions per block. The blocks still take energy to mine, but the per-transaction fee gets sharply reduced.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Transaction Costs and Tethers: Why I’m a Crypto Skeptic by paulgb on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @06:11PM (#17657712)

Do you see a solution to the energy use problem that doesn't involve a massive devaluation of Bitcoin?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Transaction Costs and Tethers: Why I’m a Crypto Skeptic by darawk on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @06:28PM (#17657850)

Right now, proof of stake seems like the best solution to the energy problem. AFAIK, bitcoin is not looking to implement PoS, so my bet is on Ethereum to address this issue.

[ Parent | on HN ]