17 years*
(midwest.social)
Science Memescross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/37913022
https://mastodon.online/@FranckLeroy/109627512801712672
The most inefficient system invented by mankind? Bro have you seen how they built the pyramids?
If those stats are true, eff. I already hated that industry.
10 Gigawatts is actually a conservative estimate considering one of the figures I found was "In 2023, bitcoin consumed about 121.13 TWh", or about 14 Gigawatts 24/7
This is neither science nor a meme
This definitionally is a meme.
My pet hate is people who say things aren’t memes when they definitionally are.
Screenshots of twitter posts are a meme genre.
You may not like that fact but it’s true.
The scientific content is debatable I’ll give you that.
100%
I hate cripto and all, but i almost hate more people posting just statements in what's suppose to be a meme community, not funny statements, no memes about politics, just text, bastardizing the point of a meme community, wich is to see... memes.
But it does express a popular opinion which helps us all feel good about ourselves, and that's what really matters
It was never meant to be used in this way at this scale though. He put out a new method/paradigm and that was that. It was the asshole investor tech bros that destroyed the planet once they learned of it.
Just like anything, almost no tech or thing is inherently bad, but it becomes bad when the ruling class get their greedy grimy little grimy in it.
Even gen AI, despite how it has been used as a tool for the enrichment of the more privileged 0.1% as a tool of suppression of artists' (and critics of technofascism's) voices, is not really a harmful technology.
With enough copyright protections, and regulation of deep fakes, digital formats, and a bunch of other things, I could see gen AI being a valuable collaborator to creative output and workflows.
Hell, other than weapons, I find it hard to justify calling any technology inherently evil or nefarious. And even then, weapons have saved many innocent people's lives against unjustified attacks, wild animals and other threats.
Still, if we don't treat each technological invention with the right amount of cautiousness and care, we risk the deaths of, sometimes, even thousands or tens of thousands of people.
Exactly. There are also hundreds of useful applications more than just consumer facing that you may be aware of. For example, I do research for climate models and we're using diffusion models to make the data assimilation step more accurate, so there's all kinds of things other than just making funny pictures or songs or whatever.
Tech is like a gun and a space ship. Neither have Will.
Also, apparently you haven't been paying attention to that Will's candid work. You're missing a few zeros on it's current work. Sure they're denying what is so fucking obvious. I hole you like cheese because our Madness Will make a Heidi face of being forced to eating something like Limburger.
Once again, a careless inventor put out something not designed to counteract obvious misuses. Shoud have designed a complete system with sensibly aligned incentives.
If only his foresight were as powerful as your hindsight.
Lots of the issues Bitcoin faces are not based on the design, but by and large what tech bros made out of it.
If you really want to learn more about it, have a look at the blocksize wars and Bitcoin Cash. Or just wait until Bitcoin finally collapses, which will happen eventually, but I'm not able to tell whether this year, decade or century.
What will break Bitcoin's neck eventually is the OPEX of its mining. Mining on the one hand is a crucial part of keeping the network secure, but on the other hand is expensive way beyond the money that can be earned from transaction fees collected when doing the mining.
Bitcoins being generated from thin air when a new block is being produced are a major part of the revenue for the miners, but the amount of BTC getting created this way gets reduced over time until it reaches 0.
The thing about the mining is that it's being done with more and more computing power, and it can't go below whatever the current amount of computing power is by a lot without putting the network at risk.
surely Bitcoin will die this time
Are there any substantial flaws in my thinking you want to point out or was that it?
google mining death spiral myth
You're missing where I'm from.
Of course come racist on twitter can't math...
What's worse is that there are modern alternatives that can process hundreds of transactions per second without any mining at all
But Bitcoin people don't care about that because they don't use Bitcoin for actual payments, they use the price to pump their bags
What alternatives are you talking about? I've not heard of any.
In case this is an honest question:
Ripple and Stellar are popular examples of networks that can process lots of transactions fast and cheap, but in my perspective they're both examples of tech bros finding a new playground - especially true for Ripple.
But there are other gems such as https://nano.org/en, which come to mind. It's true open source, was distributed for free, has transactions without a fee and can process hundreds of transactions per second with a tiny ecological footprint.
Yeah, I know, it sounds too good to be true, but if you have a closer look, it just is good.
Monero does not exactly have the capacity for hundreds of transactions per second, but offers a degree of privacy that's awesome.
And then there's the OG Ethereum, which in fact can process lots of transactions per second often at a quite low cost, which offers a Turing complete smart contract language.
You see, there are at least some alternatives, which offer lots of fast and cheap or even feeless transactions or transactions with other benefits, wuch as privacy.
The development didn't stop with the "train wreck waiting to happen Bitcoin".
I'm glad Bitcoin created the whole crypto sphere.
At the same time I'm dumbstruck how most of the whole sphere is just a soulless, useless money grab.
It's hard to find the projects that aren't, but they are here, hidden in a pile of shit.
You might realize that the projects I listed are more or less random examples, which mostly have one thing in common: they've been around for quite some time.
Nano gave out its supply with centrally administered CAPTCHAs. That means they could have simply exempted insiders from having to do the CAPTCHAs at all, getting >51% of the supply for free. You're expecting everyone who ever uses that money supply to trust a central party for something we can't audit.
Well, maybe they have, maybe they haven't.
At least they made the effort and a better system than CAPTCHAs to make it available to people without the need for special hardware or other prerequisites aside from a computer with internet access was just not there.
Plus I wonder why they've continued developing that project for the last 10+ years in case it was just meant as cash grab for insiders.
People use Bitcoin, although it's clear that Satoshi (whoever that is) has shy of 10% of the total supply: https://bitslog.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/
Needless to ask what happens to BTC holders, if that amount of BTC appear on the sell side of the market.
Nobody cares how much effort they put in if it walks like a scam and quacks like a scam. You'd have to be nuts to trust anybody in the crypto space.
Why stop developing while it's still producing revenue? With >51% of the supply, they can leech off any remaining suckers indefinitely. The price of Nano relative to Bitcoin has done exactly what one should expect. It would need to have been done correctly to begin with and can't now be un-fucked.
That's where our perceptions differ. There'd be zero need to continue development, if scamming was the goal.
The revenue could be had without additonal effort.
How is done correctly?
How would it have been done correctly a decade ago in your opinion?
All distribution schemes I know or can think of (shy of using people's biometric data to stop them from getting more than their fair share) is at risk of being expoited by in-groups - see the fortune of Satoshi.
Doing it correctly requires a cost that can be verified by outside observers.
Good thing we have 20 million alternatives and 1 million more while I was typing
So trying to get legit projects off the ground makes no sense, because 99.9% of all projects are scams?
I beg to differ!
Or did you want to insinuate something else?
I know naming is hard, but there are already other nano projects, so fuck any new ones.
By the way, do you care to name one Nano project?
One?
nano.
The text editor?
Yes? Why is that a question, there is a link.
Thanks!
Apple wants to have a word, Meta too.
Nano had a rebranding and was called Raiblocks before. While it was a quite distinct name, people wouldn't even know how to pronounce it.
I'm not overly interested in the name, I do like the attributes of "Nano, the digital money" though.
What is the modern alternative for decentralized, eco friendly money?
I know monero is praised a lot by the people of penguin but that one also requires mining.
Ethereum
It is praised for its anonymity, and it uses an algorithm that purposefully works worse on GPUs and probably ASICS, but don't quote me on that.
A lot of malware bundles miners for it because of it.
FYI you are correct
It's stuff like this that leaves me completely hopeless that the AI industry will ever see the crash that it 100% deserves.
It could always turn out like NFTs did. Don’t lose hope yet.
Why did NFTs only last a single bubble, while Bitcoin persists?
Because it seems like a stupid idea on a surface? (Not to imply it's not a stupid idea on other levels too, but crypto and AI are not ridiculous in the surface)
Bitcoin never had the US economy dependent on it. It will slowly fizzle out as people realize their monopoly money becomes worthless when nobody wants to buy it.
AI on the other hand doesn't have luxury of fizzling out because the economy is dependent on it.
@Sine_Fine_Belli @jonathan7luke this comment physically hurt me... for it's truth. fuck
Science?
Exact number = sciecnce, you not see? Releasing paper with those number in 3 week. /s
Iykyk
"Checkers"
"I think you mean checkmate, dumbass"
Not completely useless. Iranians can use it to bypass the ridiculous number of sanctions western governments arbitrarily threw at them as those neoliberals pat themselves on the back for making the situaton worse. The dollar loses its centralization and I consider that a good thing.
This is a big part of it. Its about decentralization. Currently it has a massive environmental impact, but as renewable energy and better cooling technology develops, decentralized cryptocurrencies could be better than fossil fuel invested banks.
The decentralized nature does mean that sometimes criminals can use it, but some countries will consider you a criminal based on the color of your skin.
There are already cryptocurrencies with barely a fraction of the energy use of Bitcoin.
Like my Excel spreadsheet!
Well, yeah.
A blockchain is nothing more really than a database.
The use case is when I don't want or have a trusted keeper of that data.
See, if it's your excel spreadsheet, how do I know that you're not going to change the values on it? For some things that doesn't matter - but for things like funds between different parties, etc, that can be a big issue.
Traditionally this has worked by having a trusted third party - a bank, a court, a escrow company, etc. But all these require lots of effort to have as well, and can be bad actors.
Once people realize how unsustainable Bitcoins economical scheme is, some of them will get more popular.
Don't get me started on all the other issues Bitcoin has...
I'm glad I blocked the blahaj.zone instance just to get it crossposted into a barely relevant community.
...sigh. Here I go blocking again.
What's the issue with blahaj.zone users?
It's not so much the users as the mods. I haven't met one I liked. Tend to sniff their own farts a little too deeply.
What, are you afraid you'll get cooties?
Can you block me with it please
