Yup

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    The ecological impact is entirely optional. Not all cryptos consume massive amounts of power to validate transactions. Ethereum successfully transitioned away from a power-intensive algorithm and now has massively reduced power consumption

    https://digiconomist.net/ethereum-energy-consumption

    Bitcoin could do the same thing, but won’t, because it’s development team doesn’t want to.

    • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 days ago

      Setting aside that your link isn’t actually capable of estimating the usage to maintain ETH without accessing all of its users power consumption that’s a lot of power for something with no real use case beyond crime that currencies do not do better.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        21 days ago

        The main use case for cryptocurrency ought to be as a method of payment that relies on trusting no third party. Think Venmo or PayPal or Google Pay, without having to trust Venmo or PayPal or Google. You might not value not having to trust any 3rd party, but maybe you should.

        But this is why I say the worst thing that ever happened to crypto was for its price to skyrocket. Because now nobody cares about trustless transactions, they just care about Number Go Up.