this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2023
195 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

37716 readers
327 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 118 points 11 months ago (2 children)

i strongly urge skepticism when reading articles about the environmental impacts of bitcoin. I am not saying that bitcoin is a sensible use of resources - rather that the claims made about the environmental impacts are often overstated and based on models extrapolated to absurdity. For example, see https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0321-8 where Mora, Camilo et al suggested that "Bitcoin Emissions Alone Could Push Global Warming Above 2°C". Then read Implausible projections overestimate near-term Bitcoin CO2 emissions by Masanet et al.

Again - the environmental impacts of cloud computing in general and bitcoin in particular are something we should be concerned about. But there are a number of researchers who have made wild claims that should be treated with a critical eye.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago

(Checking if outbound federation is back)

Yeah, if they had said 10 gallons, I'd buy that, but a whole swimming pool of water would be worth far more than a transaction fee I'd expect.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, generally miners will set up in places with cheap electricity. And excluding places like Azerbaijan, those sources are generally renewables.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah. Right now, the cost of a Bitcoin transaction is around $65 US. That price includes all of the expenditures that the miners have made on resources (electricity, water, rental costs for the space they're using, hardware depreciation, etc.), as well as whatever bit of profits it takes to keep miners in business. That puts a cap on whatever environmental impact the transaction is having.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So if it costs $65 for a transaction then why isn't that the transaction fee? people would be loaing money if cost is more than the fees

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Bitcoin is inflationary, it's generating new Bitcoin with every block and issuing that to the miners. That new Bitcoin combines with the transaction fees to pay the miners.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So mining is the bulk cost not the transactions. because my last bitcoin fee was like $10 or something

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Yes. If you're wanting to know how many resources mining a transaction takes, that's the value you need to look at. The block reward effectively goes into subsidizing the transaction fees that are being paid.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Bitcoin is deflationary. There is a hard limit on the total number of bitcoins that will ever exist. Every so often, the reward for mining a block is halved. Eventually there will be effectively zero reward for mining at all.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Maybe in the long run. However, when you want to actually calculate how much each transaction costs, you need to account for the fact that right now Bitcoin is inflationary. It won't stop issuing new tokens until around 2140 AD, assuming no hard forks happen to modify that issuance strategy in the meantime.