• Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    ah yes the 10th place - still, Doge is estimated to use ~1% of the energy Bitcoin uses and it’s been in steady decline since the meme blew up.

    • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      >it’s been in steady decline since the meme blew up.

      it got a pretty big bump from elon a couple years back, but dogecoin is nearly perfect money. it isn’t deflationary, it’s cheap to transact, and the on-ramps are ubiquitous.

    • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      the entire Bitcoin block chain could be run on the phone I’m using to write this. there is nothing inherent to the protocol that dictates such massive power use.

      and dogecoin merge mines with all the other script coins so how can you even calculate its independent usage?

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        9 months ago

        there is nothing inherent to the protocol that dictates such massive power use.

        Yes there is, massive power use is the entire point of proof-of-work. If Bitcoin blocks could be produced without massive power use then the blockchain’s system of validation would fail and 51% attacks would be trivial.

        • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          the hash rate for the first blocks was achievable with a pentium 3. the protocol functioned then. there is nothing inherent to the protocol that dictates more hashpower is used. a 51% attack is the protocol functioning properly.

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            9 months ago

            That’s because there were just a handful of people mining the first blocks and there was no demand, so the price was basically zero.

            The protocol is meant to promote decentralization, so I have no idea how a 51% attack would be an example of the protocol functioning properly. A 51% attack is a demonstration that the protocol is controlled by a single entity.

                  • FaceDeer@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Right. Which is not what I was talking about. This was about how a PoW chain would become useless if there was no cost involved in making blocks, ie, if the “W” part was missing. It would allow anyone to add blocks. There’d be no way to distinguish forks from each other and decide on a canonical one. Being able to agree on a particular fork as being the “valid” one in a decentralized manner is the fundamental secret sauce of what makes cryptocurrency work. All the various protocols boil down to ways of solving that one particular problem.

          • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 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
              ·
              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
                  arrow-down
                  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
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  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, .