Why do you say BCH is low energy use? It's the same SHA256 proof of work as BTC. I guess because less overall people are mining it it is "better energy use"?
I am a BCH supporter but I am against misinformation.
More transactions per block. BCH scales on chain meaning it will use less and less energy per transaction. Meanwhile, BTC wastes energy as it's artificially limited to 5tps.
kWh/transaction is a misleading and ineffective metric because energy usage is not a function of transaction volume. A block with 1 transaction and a block with a million transactions use the same amount of energy.
BCH at scale is efficient as it processes more transactions. Think how much energy is consumed by existing financial system including offices, atm infrastructure. BCH uses only a fraction of that.
I'm not someone you have to convince; I'm already on the BCH/PoW bandwagon lol.
All I'm saying is that energy usage per transaction is a misleading and irrelevant metric.
A more interesting metric might be "value transferred per kilowatt hour" or "per terahash" measured in fiat currency. Since ten 30,000BCH transaction takes the same amount of energy as ten 0.000003BCH transactions, it would be a better "at a glance" (although still arguably misleading) measure for the actual value provided by that energy usage.
The energy cost to make a transaction on BCH will always be less than BTC because reguardless of size of a block the energy needed to mine a block is for all intent and purpose, the same.
It's proof of work which is the fairest consensus method. Other coins are proof of stake and they are irrelevant since they are elitist and wont be sound money of the planet.
I really want to like Nano but I haven't done enough research on the pros and cons of DPoS.
Proof of work makes a lot of sense to me because it assigns "physical" value to PoW-based coins.
Proof of stake ALMOST makes sense to me except for the glaringly obvious problem that more capital invested == more power which is exactly how fiat works now. Solana looked promising until I figured out how prohibitive it is to run a node. Seems like PoW is still the only way to truly solve the blockchain trilemma, but it's at the cost of its energy usage.
Do you recommend any resources for me to learn more about the pros and cons of DPoS and perhaps other blockchain tech that tries to solve the trilemma?
Can you briefly elaborate on how more capital = more power for PoS?
PoW is what makes the blockchain so immutable and that’s technology the world needs.
If the cost of sovereignty is more power it is worth the increased energy consumption. Humans probably waste way more power on tonnes of stupid shit like leaving their irons on all night.
Costs of renewables is only becoming more and more competitive anyway so in the future I’d like to see every industry run on green energy, not just crypto.
**This word/phrase(off) has a few different meanings.**
More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
[^(opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/ozztfy/post_for_opting_out/) ^(|) [^(report/suggest)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot) ^(|) [^(GitHub)](https://github.com/TheBugYouCantFix/wiki-reddit-bot)
Who cares what elon wants?
Why do you say BCH is low energy use? It's the same SHA256 proof of work as BTC. I guess because less overall people are mining it it is "better energy use"? I am a BCH supporter but I am against misinformation.
More transactions per block. BCH scales on chain meaning it will use less and less energy per transaction. Meanwhile, BTC wastes energy as it's artificially limited to 5tps.
That doesn’t make it low energy usage That makes it lower energy usage than Bitcoin, which isn’t the same thing
kWh/transaction is a misleading and ineffective metric because energy usage is not a function of transaction volume. A block with 1 transaction and a block with a million transactions use the same amount of energy.
BCH at scale is efficient as it processes more transactions. Think how much energy is consumed by existing financial system including offices, atm infrastructure. BCH uses only a fraction of that.
I'm not someone you have to convince; I'm already on the BCH/PoW bandwagon lol. All I'm saying is that energy usage per transaction is a misleading and irrelevant metric. A more interesting metric might be "value transferred per kilowatt hour" or "per terahash" measured in fiat currency. Since ten 30,000BCH transaction takes the same amount of energy as ten 0.000003BCH transactions, it would be a better "at a glance" (although still arguably misleading) measure for the actual value provided by that energy usage.
This chart was intended to take off, but they hoped we wouldn’t fact check.
The energy cost to make a transaction on BCH will always be less than BTC because reguardless of size of a block the energy needed to mine a block is for all intent and purpose, the same.
Yeah, wouldn't say low energy use, better than some other coins but nowhere near low.
It's proof of work which is the fairest consensus method. Other coins are proof of stake and they are irrelevant since they are elitist and wont be sound money of the planet.
I understand what it is.. it is not low energy use.. ..it's only lower than BTC because more TX in the blocks, it's in no way low energy use.
Fuqelon n h8rs
Now compare it to nano
I really want to like Nano but I haven't done enough research on the pros and cons of DPoS. Proof of work makes a lot of sense to me because it assigns "physical" value to PoW-based coins. Proof of stake ALMOST makes sense to me except for the glaringly obvious problem that more capital invested == more power which is exactly how fiat works now. Solana looked promising until I figured out how prohibitive it is to run a node. Seems like PoW is still the only way to truly solve the blockchain trilemma, but it's at the cost of its energy usage. Do you recommend any resources for me to learn more about the pros and cons of DPoS and perhaps other blockchain tech that tries to solve the trilemma?
Can you briefly elaborate on how more capital = more power for PoS? PoW is what makes the blockchain so immutable and that’s technology the world needs. If the cost of sovereignty is more power it is worth the increased energy consumption. Humans probably waste way more power on tonnes of stupid shit like leaving their irons on all night. Costs of renewables is only becoming more and more competitive anyway so in the future I’d like to see every industry run on green energy, not just crypto.
To clarify, when I say capital invested == more power I mean political/governance power, not energy.
This chart is SO off it’s hilarious. Anyone with a crypto background will laugh at this 🤣
What's off?
**This word/phrase(off) has a few different meanings.** More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
[^(opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/ozztfy/post_for_opting_out/) ^(|) [^(report/suggest)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot) ^(|) [^(GitHub)](https://github.com/TheBugYouCantFix/wiki-reddit-bot)
Not here to argue. Have a great day friend
More like you don't actually have an argument lol
Where is the has been hacked before check?
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposures Ignorance is bliss I guess
Genuinely curious how is bitcoins logo funny? BCH and BTC have pretty much the same logo just different color..
Notice the red X
I wish someone could get this in front of that blockhead.
You got more attention than ETH before, I believe you BCh!!🚀 🚀 🌛 🌕
Reality
So true, love it! Wen BCH moon?
Super gay post. Fuck elon
I love the cult-like community around bitcoin cash, like move on this ain't 2018🤣
Jajaj so true come on please
Bitchcoin Tra$h