@AgreeableLandscape personally I prefer proof of work over proof of stake because if an attacker gets a huge amount of coins i dont see a way in which you can kick out the attacker from the network. with proof of work the rest of the network can change the mining algorithm and then the attackers investment will be worth nothing. this possibility gives more security because there is much less incentive to try to attack the network. i dont see how you can achieve the same with PoS.
I very much do not think that fact is worth the ridiculous power consumption associated with it. If you haven’t noticed, we’re in the middle of a global resource and climate crisis and absolutely do not have spare energy or hardware to throw at Cryptos. People are having trouble affording their home heating/cooling due to lack of electricity, critical sectors like hospitals and individuals alike are having trouble getting the chips they need. We do not have energy or silicon to spare for mining. Between the energy and hardware being used for scientific and biomedical computation (which is desperately needed by the way, the relatively fast development of anti-COVID medicines/vaccines were entirely thanks to advancements in biomedical simulation technology, with the main bottleneck being the speed at which the simulations could be run), compare that with the same resources being used to uselessly calculate hashes to make money for some rando, I think the answer is clear. Maybe in a Star Trek level universe with infinite energy we can use proof of work, but we’re not there and won’t be there anytime soon.
@AgreeableLandscape I’d rather see all the resources used for stupid AML checks and AML media propaganda being moved over to a tool such as cryptocurrencies which actually help people instead of limiting them.
I don’t know how much energy AML checks consume but I imagine since their workflow is not literally centered around wasting a set large amount energy as proof of legitimacy, crypto mining probably surpassed it ages ago. Not even defending AML checks here, but I just find it really weird you’re talking about that.
As an environmental science major, I can tell you right now that climate change and the energy crisis is a human extinction level threat, like, literally the thing that is most likely to kill the most people in history, possibly all people. What level threat do you think not having proof of work crypto is? (Not even banning all crypto, literally just phasing out the by far most energy intensive one.)
@AgreeableLandscape personally I prefer proof of work over proof of stake because if an attacker gets a huge amount of coins i dont see a way in which you can kick out the attacker from the network. with proof of work the rest of the network can change the mining algorithm and then the attackers investment will be worth nothing. this possibility gives more security because there is much less incentive to try to attack the network. i dont see how you can achieve the same with PoS.
I very much do not think that fact is worth the ridiculous power consumption associated with it. If you haven’t noticed, we’re in the middle of a global resource and climate crisis and absolutely do not have spare energy or hardware to throw at Cryptos. People are having trouble affording their home heating/cooling due to lack of electricity, critical sectors like hospitals and individuals alike are having trouble getting the chips they need. We do not have energy or silicon to spare for mining. Between the energy and hardware being used for scientific and biomedical computation (which is desperately needed by the way, the relatively fast development of anti-COVID medicines/vaccines were entirely thanks to advancements in biomedical simulation technology, with the main bottleneck being the speed at which the simulations could be run), compare that with the same resources being used to uselessly calculate hashes to make money for some rando, I think the answer is clear. Maybe in a Star Trek level universe with infinite energy we can use proof of work, but we’re not there and won’t be there anytime soon.
@AgreeableLandscape I’d rather see all the resources used for stupid AML checks and AML media propaganda being moved over to a tool such as cryptocurrencies which actually help people instead of limiting them.
We are all different.
I don’t know how much energy AML checks consume but I imagine since their workflow is not literally centered around wasting a set large amount energy as proof of legitimacy, crypto mining probably surpassed it ages ago. Not even defending AML checks here, but I just find it really weird you’re talking about that.
As an environmental science major, I can tell you right now that climate change and the energy crisis is a human extinction level threat, like, literally the thing that is most likely to kill the most people in history, possibly all people. What level threat do you think not having proof of work crypto is? (Not even banning all crypto, literally just phasing out the by far most energy intensive one.)