News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index. Parent comment

Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by jkuria on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @01:32PM (#26092998)
Mining for gold is even more inefficient. You've got dig earth several kilometers down, build massive infrastructure, use harmful chemicals to purify it, lose lives etc etc
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by minsc__and__boo on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @02:37PM (#26093653)
That's falsely equating fixed and variable costs. A mined bitcoin is useless if the network isn't burning electricity, whereas mined gold is continually useful after mining.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by wonnage on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @01:57PM (#26093261)
At least gold is useful for something though
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index by kosievdmerwe on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @02:19PM (#26093468)
Gold also doesn't require constant electricity expenditure to keep it's value and "utility"z

A kilo of gold once mined is perpetual. A bitcoin needs the whole network to keep running (and be large enough so that miners can't collude) to keep it's value.

[ Parent | on HN ]