News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index. Parent comment

Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by aeternum on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @11:36AM (#26091360)
By computing more hashes, you raise the difficulty for everyone else mining so you do ultimately push out the less efficient miners.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by rspeele on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @01:32PM (#26092995)
That's efficient if you define efficiency as hashes computed per watt. That's the metric by which less-efficient miners are driven out.

However, this does nothing for the overall energy efficiency of Bitcoin, which could be defined as transactions processed per gigawatt. If energy gets cheaper, that number only gets smaller.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by lxgr on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @01:25PM (#26092914)
The problem is that there is, by definition, economic incentive to spend an amount of electric energy equal to the economic value of transaction confirmation to all protocol participants.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by meow112012 on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @12:04PM (#26091800)
If someone has money and power already, they can take a better chance to get more bitcoin. How about the other guys and the other guys ... 10/20 years later?
[ Parent | on HN ]