this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
179 points (99.4% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35741 readers
1473 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Yes, believable, from all the payment methods available, Greenpeace would choose the most fucking inefficient one, that wastes 700 kWh for a single transaction, that's 100 households!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ignotum 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lol, 700kWh?

Crypto is very powerhungry, but it's not even close to that much much

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It's a conservative estimate, it's even higher than that

Crypto-biased source: https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/08/18/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-use/ (you would expect they downplay the number)

You can just take a calculator and do by yourself the math from publicly available stats https://bitinfocharts.com/bitcoin/

In the past 24 hours a block contains in average only 3500 transactions. Then that block needs to be validated by many other nodes in following calculations.

This is why it's the most inefficient payment method, very slow (only 3500 transactions in ten minutes instead of few seconds), expensive for the user (transfer fees are high) and power hungry

[–] PlantDadManGuy 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You have no idea what you're talking about, or else you're intentionally misleading people. Transferring Bitcoin in a single transaction takes nowhere near as much power as mining it. Yes, BTC is stupid and terrible for the environment, but you don't need to lie about the stats.

[–] hitwright 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

https://www.forbes.com/advisor/investing/cryptocurrency/bitcoins-energy-usage-explained/

I mean by somewhat more up to date news it seems like he is correct. Bitcoin is wildly inefficient and basically non scaling.

[–] PlantDadManGuy 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

He is wildly incorrect because he phrased it in an intentionally deceitful manner. It does not require 700 kilowatt hours of energy to transfer one Bitcoin one time. The verbiage quote "single transaction", is the entire problem with OPs post.

[–] hitwright 0 points 1 month ago

I understand lightning network exists to somewhat reduce intermediate transactions. But the actual transaction to be written into the blockchain a lot of energy must be used to calculate the hash. Still difficult to follow you on how the number is wrong, mate.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

please explain how to transfer bitcoin without mining a block, since the transactions are contained there.

You need to take the energy required to mine a block and validate it (a lot, could power a small town), then divide for the few transactions that could be included in just 1 mb.

They impose a size limit on the transactions that can be included, so even if tomorrow the transactions increase 10x, each block could contain the same limited number. Of course, if you only count the electricity used by your machine to send the transaction, it's just a few milliwatts. The problem is all the garbage calculations that need to be done to actually validate it.

[–] PlantDadManGuy 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You're arguing in bad faith and I'm not going to put up with your stupid straw man. Your statement was that it requires 700 kilowatt hours for a single transaction and that is blatantly false. You seem to ignore the obvious fact that Bitcoin can be transferred unlimited number of times and you do not have to re-mine the Bitcoin every single time you transfer it. As I said earlier, I already agree with you that Bitcoin sucks and you're wasting your time arguing with me over semantics.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Can you do a transfer without mining a block?

No, it needs to be included in any freshly mined block.

Can you include an unlimited amount of transactions in a block to minimize the wasted energy?

No, it's hardcoded to around 1 mb and since the average is 300 bytes, that translates to ~3000

Can you mine a Bitcoin without wasting an immense amount of energy?

No.

So, by math, you take that immense amount of energy and divide by ~3000 transactions.

You can't just take in consideration the 3 watts used by your computer in the 300 milliseconds used to submit the transfer, need to consider the whole network

I would be happy to learn if it's possible to transfer them without including the transaction in a block, that would be groundbreaking and then the electricity used would be 10000x less