The True Cost Of Bitcoin

The power consumption of the Bitcoin network is a direct result of the mechanism by which it establishes trust to its participants. Bitcoin was developed to create a decentralized electronic currency system, and since the direct transfer of assets is not plausible electronically, information now becomes the store of value. But unlike the traditional concept of a commodity, there is no actual definition of an object that represents a Bitcoin. Rather, the network operates on a ledger that is accepted by all participants.
This ledger contains the entire transaction history of the Bitcoin network, representing the changes of ownership, of amounts of a definition less entity called Bitcoin, since its genesis in 2009. This shared ledger is maintained by thousands of computers worldwide, called nodes, operating on a peer-to-peer network. Each node keeps a separate copy of the entire ledger and combined they form the public permission less voting system that validates every transaction. When a transaction occurs, the sender’s balance from a previous Bitcoin transaction is transferred to one or more public recipients of an asymmetric cryptographic key pair.
Once a transaction is created, it’s sent to the closest node where it is subsequently distributed throughout the network. A special transaction, known as a block reward is also added to the block, as an incentive mechanism for miners to build upon the network by block creation.
Each mining node can independently choose which transactions will appear in a new block, but only one can earn the authority to add their block to the chain of existing blocks, that every participant on the network accepts as the Bitcoin blockchain. Finding this hash is called proof of work or PoW. Once a valid hash is found, the new block is broadcasted to the rest of the network where it is validated and added to each node’s copy of the blockchain.
As of February 2021, it takes roughly 90 sextillion hash guesses to create a valid bitcoin block. This dramatic rise in the needed computational power is a direct result of an inbuilt mechanism of the bitcoin network that raises or lowers the lead zero count requirement of a block hash, in order to keep the average creation time of a new block to around 10 minutes.
At its inception, each bitcoin block created, rewarded 50 bitcoin. As of February 2021, one block reward is worth 6.25 bitcoin.
POWER CONSUMPTION
As the value of bitcoin rises, miners collectively unleash more computing power at the network to capitalize from the higher prices. This inherently forces the network difficulty to increase and eventually, an equilibrium is reached between the profitability of mining and network difficulty. And within this feedback loop that regulates the network, lies a key link between bitcoin and a real-world resource, power consumption.
As of February 2021, the total network hash rate has hovered around one hundred fifty quintillion block hashes calculated every second, globally. In this case, the total hash rate of the network can be said to be 150 million TH/s. Because these devices are the most efficient miners on the network, it sets the theoretically lower limit of energy consumption at 4.5 gigajoules per second or about 40 terawatt-hours per year if the current total hash rate is maintained. This approach assumes that all mining participants in the network aim to make a profit and that all new Bitcoins produced by mining, must at least, be higher on average to the\an operating costs of mining.
SCALE OF POWER
Even the most conservative estimate of the network ranks it as high as the 56th most power-consuming country in the world, New Zealand. At the current best estimate of the network’s power consumption levels, each bitcoin transaction took around 700-kilowatt-hours to process.
Further compounding bitcoin's power consumption issues is the fact that mining hardware must run continuously to be effective. This makes it difficult to employ excess power generation strategically for mining use, effectively making mining consumption a baseline power demand on infrastructure.
In fact, it’s estimated that China single-handedly operates almost 50% of the bitcoin network, with the nation of Georgia following in second with a little over 25% of all mining, and the US in 3rd place with 11.5%. The annual carbon footprint of the bitcoin network is estimated to be around 37 Mt of carbon dioxide.
FUTURE
Alternative consensus mechanisms, like proof of stake (PoS), have been developed to address the power consumption associated with proof of work.
Many experts still warn that in its current growth trajectory, it is simply unsustainable for bitcoin to become a global reserve currency as this would require the network to consume a significant portion of all energy produced globally.
SUPPORT NEW MIND ON PATREON
/ newmind​​
SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS
Instagram - / newmindchannel

[@WarpedPerception]

That was awesome! I've been trying to explain this to all of my family and friends for a long time, I just sent everyone this video!

[@THEMAX00000]

Do you also send them a video that explains this video?

[@bencheevers6693]

I read the description and it has to be flawed or I don't understand something, it says that every transaction costs 700 kwh to process, that would make the cost of every transaction 100$ usd, every block has 2000 transactions which would make the cost 200000 dollars, every block gives 6.5 bitcoin and bitcoin costs 30k which gives 195k, it seems like they arrived at their number this way by dividing the price of the rewards of a block of bitoin by number of transactions in that block and then finding out how much that cost would pay for in power. That would mean that mining would return very closely what it costs in power but this isn't the case. I've also seen on google that it's not 700 kwh but 1500 and that wouldn't make any sense at all, the power cost to return is about 10% in first world countries but in industrial China where power is about 3/5ths it would be even less, like 7 percent so the actual power consumption of every transaction is probably closer to 7% of that 700 kwh figure or 50 kwh. This also makes sense because that's the gas cost of transactions and intuitively if transactions cost the full trading value of bitcoin then they would be worthless.

[@tonnentonie2767]

It would be interesting to measure the materials used in the mining devices, also the power needed to build those rigs.

[@147258GS]

Would be interesting to know what the worldwide banking industry uses as a comparison.

[@financialchimes4546]

Far more.

[@kelownatechkid]

Overall this is a good video. The minor errors do not detract from the main point, which is unfortunately accurate. BTC as it stands is a massive drain on the grid

[@bencheevers6693]

I read the description and it has to be flawed or I don't understand something, it says that every transaction costs 700 kwh to process, that would make the cost of every transaction 100$ usd, every block has 2000 transactions which would make the cost 200000 dollars, every block gives 6.5 bitcoin and bitcoin costs 30k which gives 195k, it seems like they arrived at their number this way by dividing the price of the rewards of a block of bitoin by number of transactions in that block and then finding out how much that cost would pay for in power. That would mean that mining would return very closely what it costs in power but this isn't the case. I've also seen on google that it's not 700 kwh but 1500 and that wouldn't make any sense at all, the power cost to return is about 10% in first world countries but in industrial China where power is about 3/5ths it would be even less, like 7 percent so the actual power consumption of every transaction is probably closer to 7% of that 700 kwh figure or 50 kwh. This also makes sense because that's the gas cost of transactions and intuitively if transactions cost the full trading value of bitcoin then they would be worthless.

[@Kevin_Street]

Thank you for this video! It's certainly an eye opener on a problem I didn't know about before now.

[@jeffsteyn7174]

What problem? Bitcoin at most uses 121twh globally. 76% of which are renewables. Aircon in the US alone uses double that 264twh. TVs use 440twh. Electric cars already use 80twh a year. Everything uses electricity. It's just a lame narrative been pushed by bitcoin haters.

[@GiovaniMoreiraG]

Not having my savings stolen by the government through inflation is not a problem i'd say. Long live BTC!

[@SpacedogD]

Thanks. I like this video, it gave a lot of useful basic technical information on how bitcoin work without going too simplistic that masks the actual math that happens.

[@nicholasdavidowicz9832]

Wow one of the best videos I've seen on Bitcoin. Well done.

[@TerrifyingBird]

Best video on bitcoin, ever, as expected from your channel. Keep it up!

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to us on a good trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Whats@pp.

[@tophatv2902]

@@user-gt8xx8nw3g BOT ALERT SCAM ALERT

[@andyrbush]

So well presented and fascinating

[@u0aol1]

I don't get to play games anymore. My life is measured in Satoshis. Green = Good. Red = Bad. Mind = Lost in Buy and Sell orders. The true cost of bitcoin was my mind.

[@brainkill7034]

Fantastic video, thanks for sharing!

[@rhynosouris710]

Answer seems relatively simple. Either ban mining farms outright, or charge them a premium fee for electricity. Mining would then return to a few thousand enthusiastic individual miners running their home rigs.

[@spraynpray]

The point of the technology is to avoid regulation and the malevolence of government. All this wasted effort of mining is to avoid what you're suggesting. You can ban it, but people are going to flock to something else because the need is still there and unmet.

[@ZeeCaptainRon]

I see that you fail to understand what economy of scale actually means. It would be like you ban automated farming and expect the world to eat from backyard hand cultivated gardens. The cost would go up exponentially.

[@PetrGladkikh]

4:20 - it is _maximum_ number of zeroes. There's 15/16 chance to guess minimum number of zeroes (that is starting with a non zero) on the first random try.

[@MatthijsvanDuin]

Ehm what, no? If the _minimum_ number of leading zeros is 10 then the probability of a successful try is 1/2^10. If the _maximum_ number of leading zeros were 10 then the probability of success would be (2^11-1)/2^11. Regardless, difficulty is not actually measured in leading zeros, since that would only allow difficulty to scale by powers of two while in reality it is much more fine-grained. Instead, the hash value interpreted as 256-bit integer has to be below a target value (which is a 256-bit integer compactly encoded into a weird custom 32-bit floating point format).

[@dexterdextrow7248]

Good that these things are covered in the news! Oh wait...

[@mizutofu]

because this is fake news

[@jfbarnard3109]

People can barely understand bitcoin itself so I wouldn't expect them to start explaining socio-economic and technical ramifications on mainstream news. It's also not the place to learn about any kind of innovation anyway other than the fact that they exist. Plus, if you start telling people that this virtual entity is sucking most of the planet's energy, people will dismiss crypto as being the problem while the solution is to progress further than the first ever proof of concept that was created. Just, please, don't rely on the news 🙏

[@dexterdextrow7248]

@@jfbarnard3109 one should never rely solely on one source, but you would be foolish to dismiss news coverage for the reason of it not being satisfyingly thorough in every subject that is taken up. It's a summary of world events, that works well as a basis for you to then decide what subjects to delve deeper into. I for one often find pop culture news very mundane and uninteresting, so I wouldn't dedicate longer periods of time to research this subject, but I still find it useful to have a general overview of what for example Hollywood, the Oscar's or the Disney company is up to. Thereby I do find it disappointing if these sorts of subjects aren't covered, even if it's relegated to be merely mentioned in passing.

[@jfbarnard3109]

@@dexterdextrow7248 yes I completely agree, that's why I'm saying it's the place to learn that those thing exists. Just that bitcoin's energy usage would surely be covered through a very hurtful narative. If a news source is able to provide an unbiased coverage of the full issue, truely big props to them

[@bobsmith120]

Good video

[@AaronSchwarz42]

Just as there are different metals of value & printed notes & coins (cash) debit & credit // crypto coins do not have to replace traditional payment systems, they just add another kind of currency exchange with high liquidity to other defacto currencies like the Euro or USD // etc perhaps better liquidity that gold or silver or platinum since you can spend digital currencies online // etc

[@henkvanderwath4405]

Q - What is the true cost of maintaining the current financial system globally? and then how do the two compare? Consider the IT systems, human exertion getting to and from work to produce the same services crypto delivers. Doing a cost and benefits factor analyst determining which is worse or better for the environment. Otherwise, what are you comparing against?

[@FlameRat_YehLon]

Thing is, traditional financial system has different level of approach, you get SWIFT to do global trunk transactions, and then smaller and smaller network, one unsafer than the previous to do smaller distance/value transactions. For example, within China there are 4 levels of digital transaction (5 if including fully offline transaction), and the safer the transaction is, the larger the amount is allowed per transaction, but each transaction would cost more resource. You don't need to contact a server at all when paying to ride a bus (they would just trust you to be able to may the payment), but to purchase real estate online you need to have your computer assigned a secure certificate in advance plus owning a dynamic key device for the transaction to be issued. Meanwhile decentralized cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin really tries to be the one solution to fit all and that obviously isn't going to work. In fact Bitcoin also make use of smaller centralized network to process smaller transactions, but that kinda defeat the point of using Bitcoin because it wouldn't be any different from using traditional methods.

[@henkvanderwath4405]

@@FlameRat_YehLon You are so right, I love the answer! It sounds like safety, the size of the amount exchanged and the infrastructure dictates the methods used in trading for goods and services. Almost like the services layer up, where bitcoin may become another digital transactional level rather than replacing everything. What I take from your answer is that wanting to replace everything with crypto is where the pain points come up, especially when they resolve back to performing the smaller centralized network processes again. With China's WeChat, would you say it cuts away pressure on the 4/5 levels or just makes it a complicated mess or something entirely different? From the outside looking in it looks like a socially integrated system, something crypto can become over time working worldwide vs regionally. I could be entirely wrong here just asking.

[@FlameRat_YehLon]

@@henkvanderwath4405 Yeah. Especially giving that decentralized cryptocurrencies by far costs even more than nation-issued currencies, trying to replace traditional currency with those probably isn't a good idea, but if everyone can agree on its value, maybe it could be a new highest layer of transaction method, that is, each country no longer have to buy exchange from each other but rather buy this new fancy cryptocurrency instead. As for what WeChat has caused, well, it doesn't change anything. The 4 levels are defined by government regulation (the fully offline one isn't in the regulation) so no software can circumvent it. All WeChat does is to implement them in their system to comply the regulation, and so does Alipay. That's said, giving that the transaction function in WeChat is mainly for "nickle and dime" type of payment, I don't think WeChat has the highest tier (certificate+another method) implemented, while Alipay does, and so does most bank's own online banking service. Only business and super rich people need to care about that though, giving that that tier has 2mil RMB (30k USD) limit, which of course isn't most people's "daily" spending and thus there's no need for it to be easy.

[@borsiak]

I'd like to see honest and non biased comparison of traditional, multinational banking system vs. Bitcoin in terms environmental impact ...just think about all those banks their employees commuting to and from work ,the amounts of paper(trees) ,computers/servers running all the time etc.

[@elementiro]

I'm not sure if that's a fair comparison. Banking is much broader service than just money transactions. Lots of the work of mentioned people (and the papers) come from these additional services, like e.g. loans or general assistance in transations. But yeah, it could be an interesting comparison. Although I believe traditional banking still would be better for envoirment. Also, in traditional banking there's still lots of space to reduce this impact, like moving all services to web and electronic payments only, implementing better AI to determine who can get the loan to reduce amount of people needed etc. while in Bitcoin it's more difficult - most of it would come from general improvement in computational technology from which traditional banking servers would also benefit.

[@ryanthomas9693]

Yes, there have been a few comparisons trying to deduce this and when you think of it this way, Bitcoin looks a lot less perilous.

[@gspaulsson]

@@ryanthomas9693 Look at the volatility of BTC and tell me if it looks less perilous. Its market value is based entirely on speculation.

[@irishjet2687]

@@gspaulsson Worse than speculation. Crypto is entirely a "bigger fool" game, where you only get rich if you get other people to get into it, allowing you to make your crypto more and more valuable until you cash out. Crypto doesn't offer "freedom", and blockchain's potential is very limited. It's terrible at acting as actual currency, and doesn't solve any problems with the banking and wealth networks that already exist. Crypto's a cult, it's terrible for society, it's disadvantaged users, and the environment, and it should be regulated into the ground.

[@JoyOfTacos]

@@ryanthomas9693a bigger fools scam taking up the entire power supply of a small country in order to service a fraction of the users as the global banking system isn’t a difficult comparison to parse.

[@afgor1088]

even in countries that mostly use low carbon energy bitcoin STILL causes significant carbon emissions since that's energy that otherwise wouldn't need to be used. say a country has a low carbon generation capacity of 1GW and uses that 1GW exactly on all things except bitcoin, then along comes bitcoin demanding an extra 100MW, that 100MW would need to be taken from other sources of energy probably gas

[@trumanhw]

does the comparative cost of "wealth creation" via Bit Coin vs gold matter..? Or is gold considered 'inevitable" bc of it's utility..?

[@srpenguinbr]

well gold is useful in industry at least

[@raphi72]

@@srpenguinbr 50% of gold is used in jewelry and many tons are just locked up in a vault. Only a very small part of gold is actually used in electronics.

[@Excalibur32]

Very informative video, thank you.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to us on a good trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Whats@pp.

[@tophatv2902]

@@user-gt8xx8nw3g BOT ALERT SCAM ALERT

[@pawala7]

Also consider that PoW only gets more expensive as the value of the market increases due to the incentive to do 51% attacks. Meanwhile, this means PoS is only viable if there is sufficient trust in the even distribution of the staked resource. Even then, there is always a risk that top holders could organize to game the network. The inherent anonymity of the system means that we can never be sure if we've reached a sufficiently distributed point for a transition to PoS.

[@joshuatinyforest1204]

8:42 _"Because these devices are the most efficient miners currently on the network, it sets the theoretical lower limit of energy consumption, at 4.5 Gigajoules per second."_ I just googled how much power 4.5 Gigajoules is... A nuclear bomb is estimated to release 4.184 gigajoules upon detonation. 9:43 The most accurate number is *two times* greater than the _most efficient_ devices, which may I remind you created the *lower limit* of power consumption.

[@Striderly]

What they do with all of those processing power? did they using all of mining rig to be used as supercomputer with crypto reward?

[@SimGunther]

He can't hide the truth in Dan's article on "PoW is efficent"... It's just so much more energy efficient than the banking system that's gobbling up our energy

[@jeffsteyn7174]

No. It's already doing an important job of protecting a asset worth $1trillion dollar market cap and protecting $7b in daily transactions.

[@SMJSmoK]

Are there estimates of how much power it would consume if all transactions on the Earth were processed by it and how it would compare to the current system?

[@sLyz0r]

Network difficulty actually has nothing to do with transaction capability. Difficulty, and therefore power consumption, is adjusted by the protocol so that miners "guess" a new block approximately every 10 minutes. Difficulty and power consumption rises if more miners join. Transactions are independent of the difficulty and depend on the blocks itself. Therefore you can not give an answer to this since difficulty can change from basically nothing to insanely high. Furthermore there are now possibilities to perform transactions via 2nd layer protocols, which are basically free of power consumption.

[@siavash2176]

You can process unlimited number of transactions on Bitcoin via lightning network and it will have no effect on mining or Bitcoin energy consumption. Bitcoin is the most efficient monetary system mankind ever had.

[@joefox9875]

@@siavash2176 It's not an efficient system, however beautiful it might be

[@siavash2176]

@@joefox9875 in comparison to what? İt's the most efficient system for storing and transferring wealth

[@joefox9875]

@@siavash2176 most wealth is held in computers in the bank. Using the client-server relationship, where one computer holds all the records. That's more efficient.

[@dewiz9596]

Madness.

[@saireddy15145]

please explain data mining concepts....

[@peterschneider8080]

Who else scanned the QR code and got called stupid ? 😂

[@skl27]

Yeah proof of work is kind of mind blowing. It is a cool concept in theory but as we see sometimes with cryptography, it is a bit too far from reality.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp

[@charleshines6155]

I thought the true cost was all the money people keep spending. That hardware is not cheap!! Then there is always faster hardware too.

[@akaegotist]

Is this a reupload?

[@ndgoliberty]

At 50k bitcoin only uses 16.5 Billion dollars of electricity per year to remain profitable for the miners. This is lower than thousands of manufacturing companies. Including Tesla and all the other major car manufacturers.

[@kiseitai2]

Proof of Stake might be more efficient, but I feel it takes away the ability of individuals to make an income from it. My thought is that you can’t both hold a regular job and ensure that your validator node stays running 24/7. The penalty as I see it in Etherium’s planned changes is too much for your average person to generate a UBI out of it. Proof of Work may be inefficient, but it lets regular nodes to get something out of the mining process if the algorithm itself is resilient to ASICS.

[@joefox9875]

My experience is that I can participate in the running of networks because of proof of stake. Have you heard of Cardano and Algorand? There are proof of stake systems which one doesn't need any technical knowledge at all!

[@tophatv2902]

@@joefox9875 BOT ALERT SCAM ALERT

[@jfbarnard3109]

Letting younger people use their gpu to participate in Eth protocol and earn their part in the network was such a solid foundation. I consider myself very lucky to have been here for it and learned so much. Too bad people took it too far with gpu farms. Shows how unsustainable the mechanism is. However, I think there will be a many more permission-less protocols in the future with better computing utilisation than straight proof of work as well as proof of stake networks with no slashing for peace of mind

[@PalaRobe]

check out Monero, ASIC resistant PoW for CPUs.

[@MartinHabovstiak]

First and foremost, PoS is nowhere near as secure as PoW.

[@rossjohnson7916]

Great video! It could however touch on the true cost of the hardware involved. Much of the hardware created is purpose built and useless for any other purpose. So ultimately adds to ewaste (which may or may not be 'mostly' recycled... we don't yet live in a circular economy). More importantly, it is contributing to global shortage of electrical components and manufacturing capacity (which impacts almost every industry these days). It's long been known that Bitcoin mining has lead to a shortage of graphics hardware for general computing. More recently though it is impacting an enormous number of industries which depend on electronic circuits in their products. A good example is car manufacture. As we try to curb emissions by moving to EVs, that's even more worrying.

[@JackFou]

Not only does bitcoin mining contribute to shortages of chips available for other purposes as you mention but also keep in mind that producing hardware has a real world cost in terms of energy expended for digging up and refining material, shipping, manufacture and assembly etc. This is an awful lot of resources and manpower being dedicated to build hardware which, as you already mentioned, is single purpose and likely barely (if at all) recycled.

[@HenryGlick]

Having worked in electronics recycling, most of it is a shoddy mess of companys just trading amongst themselves and creating very little value.

[@sergeialonichau5975]

To add to the energy consumption issue: bitcoin network is also prone to 51% attack (with photonic ASICS in one's hands this threat is real), as well as there are quantum computer algorithms to efficiently compute a private key give n a public key and a signature, to that add government regulations may change any time and make it illegal to mine or use bitcoin (like it is now in China).

[@V3RM1LI0N]

my brother, please revise this video with the fact that BTC mining pushes for more green energy consumption, the L2 solution Lightning Network, and the question of WHY Bitcoin. thanks, let not just say "bitcoin lots of energy" as thats a bad narrative

[@bogdanbosoi1483]

There no "green" energy consumption. Energy is a scalable measure that has to be produced, stored AND transported to the consumer. Even if you paddle with you bare feet to produce "energy" you need a generator, and some wires for which someone elese consumed " energy" to manufacture them ( casting/forging, welding, etc). And you also need " energy" for yourself in order to paddle ( food and water). Analyze this chain of "energy" supply and tell us how much "green" is in all of it...

[@V3RM1LI0N]

@@bogdanbosoi1483 i meant to say production not consumption. please revise your comment , thank you apologies for the misunderstanding

[@TheQuantumFreak]

Very informative, awesome work.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp.

[@tophatv2902]

@@user-gt8xx8nw3g BOT ALERT SCAM ALERT

[@askvic611]

Processing the Ledger/Transaction-Block isnt why it consumes so much Power, thats actually straight forward but than the system wouldnt have become so intriguing to participate in joining the network, its the Gametheory,PoW-part why it consumes so much. I wonder If "by design" the system is heading to become centralized to counter-act the flaws the more it is used, the perfect trosian horse. 🙈

[@monad_tcp]

That would go against its purpose. then we better go back to using Gold.

[@tophatv2902]

@@monad_tcp true

[@askvic611]

@@monad_tcp maybe its only purpose was to get the public attracted to digital-only money. 🤔

[@jfbarnard3109]

Bitcoin is stuck in it's current state. There is no design pushing it towards centralization, and there is no design pushing it towards improvement. It's valued as it is and it's far from perfect. The digitalization of value is the next obvious step, so the best way to make a change is to take the time to learn about the different solutions and make an educated choice

[@askvic611]

@@jfbarnard3109 by design (in its current state) the math gets more and more complex, im sure you'll figure out the implications of that. Just compare what was needed to mine the first 1million coins to what is needed now.

[@synthshoot1026]

Basically taking useful energy and converting it irreversibly to data

[@asldfjkalsdfjasdf]

Your comment just did the same... How useful it is lies in the eye of the beholder. But i do agree that bitcoin does not solve the universal exchange medium problem we have in a good way.

[@synthshoot1026]

@@asldfjkalsdfjasdf Yeah, except that I'm throwing away a cup of water on my backyard. And Bitcoin is evaporating the sea without forming clouds.

[@aeebeecee3737]

The moral of the Bitcoin story is: any centralized organization is not worthy of anyone's trust.

[@davidgruen7423]

Moral of the story is, currency is meant to be spent, like a current, always flowing, if you stop using it, there will be problems.

[@aeebeecee3737]

@@davidgruen7423 You mean that currency is designed for the exchanges of social value? And the value of things comes from the fact that the things can be profitable for solving problems? Right?

[@davidgruen7423]

@@aeebeecee3737 I meant the currency is an incentive to make people keep creating things, and most importantly things that people need. That’s the only reason money has value, it’s value is it keeps the production in the society going, efficiently and meaningfully. But if some how the process is stopped, money will lose its value.

[@brodie652]

This video is great, it’s great to think about the other side of Bitcoin mining. However I do work with an electrical contractor and talk to electricians every day, and from everything we can gather, having a baseline power demand on electrical infrastructure is actually a good thing. this video just made it sound like it’s a decently big problem.

[@Marcel_Augustin]

Having a more predictable power consumption is of course better for the Energy-Networks. However, to assume that Bitcoin would provide this "Baseline" as part of it's hyped "all-healing properties" is just wrong. We already have a baseline: The energy used at night in the respective Energy-Network, because energy-consumption regulary peaks at day. At best, it would just "add" to the baseline, which is not what we need right now. What Bitcoin does is creating a volatile, speculative currency with no oversight or regulation. It is not a "Digital Saviour".

[@fleyua7176]

No, what it is doing is increasing the baseload.

[@Mr.Leeroy]

700Wh per action.. while I am doing my best to stay within ~250Wh for my entire homelab.. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU.. how this world still stands?

[@nickflynn666]

700 kWh per transaction.

[@madisonbrigman8186]

if NDB succeeds with their goal of integrated radio-voltaic chips, this will no longer be an issue; frankly powering any handheld device will not longer be an issue.

[@dennisalbert6115]

If that power wasn't used for bitcoin it would still be produced and more likely wasted being used in other systems less efficient than blockchain, because the power producers always look for more market and more ways to increase power production

[@Pencil0fDoom]

And the Comptroller of the Currency just mainstreamed Central Bank Issued Cryptocurrencies, which means this systemic inefficiencies will soon be multiplied across the geoeconomics landscape... except that blockchain decentralization is utter anathema to Banks, especially the Central kind. Same goes for anonymity. So while they may not suffer from the purpose built computational electricity drains, these emergent official digital currencies will likely be crypto in the loosest, least significant senses imaginable.

[@joefox9875]

We will soon find out how much the public value decentralization!

[@monad_tcp]

That will only be a good thing as the banks can consolidate transactions, which makes the entire system more efficient. Of course that goes against the purpose of having a distributed currency, because now you introduced the dreaded banks again. I guess the common folk will like it, because they like the imaginary stability of banks. I'm still wondering how could people let the bankers have it, leaving the gold standard. Bitcoin was the only hope...

[@mrrgb4954]

wrong, we have new technologies like proof of stake which will cut energy use to almost nothing

[@mynameisben123]

For a comparison, what’s the power usage of all gold mining, refining, storage, distribution and sale activities for a year?

[@CryptoTonight9393]

THIS!!!!

[@evannibbe9375]

Still less, especially since once you have mined the gold, the energy cost of giving it to someone else is just the answer to “do you even lift bro” (the Federal Reserve’s gold transaction cost is even lower in terms of energy use, as it is just a matter of putting new labels on the gold bars of the countries keeping it stored there for safe keeping. Furthermore, gold has value outside of being a means of transaction, which mostly negates your point when the processors that mine Bitcoin have a lot of similarly expensive (in terms of energy use in manufacturing) parts in them including gold. Thus, the amortized transaction cost of gold approaches 0, while the amortized transaction cost of all Bitcoin from the point at which it is mined approaches infinity, since, in order to be accepted as having value, the buyer has to know that Bitcoin mining operations will continue into the future.

[@mynameisben123]

The cost of processing Bitcoin transactions per year does not approach infinity, it approaches the sum of all transaction fees. It is only artificially elevated now because we are in the initial mining phase. This is why it’s better to compare to what I asked in my original question (which most certainly doesn’t approach zero). The cost of mining gold I’d imagine would be slightly lower than its value in dollars, which is funnily enough approximately the same cost of mining bitcoin. I just don’t know that figure for gold.

[@csehszlovakze]

consider making a vid on monero

[@deirdreorourke8631]

The video suggests that fewer transactions would reduce power consumption, but this isn't true. If empty blocks were produced, the power consumption due to mining would remain the same. Verifying a transaction does have a thermodynamic cost, but it's a few hash operations, and ECDSA operation, probably costs less energy than opening Microsoft Word. Mining IS energy intensive, but you're not reducing global energy usage by making fewer bitcoin transactions.

[@jamesholden9540]

So what happens when the last Bitcoin is mined?

[@ZeroSpawn]

All block chains explode. 👍🏾💩

[@1337ghomri]

The miners will only get rewarded with transaction fees.

[@zuilok]

Either the price will skyrocket even more or the entire system will crash if the incentive to process the transactions wont be sufficient. But we wont find that out in our lifetimes.

[@whatfireflies]

Nothing. The last human will die before that happens.

[@jamestheotherone742]

Doesn't matter. The Nakamoto have already made their billions.

[@samsungtvset3398]

In the final scene the earth is rotating backwards.

[@aeebeecee3737]

backward is forward

[@mingming9604]

good thing it move to proof of stake. that's a winner for both gamers as well as the environment!

[@csehszlovakze]

it's especially a winner for the powers that don't want you to be!

[@autistadolinux5336]

No, its good for people who can buy a crap ton of the coins. At the least in the PoW, even if a government or any "ruler" of the world buy the majority of miners, it will have to run them and consume the energy and time (emphasys in "time") no matter how "economically rich" they are, they will need to be "energetically rich" and "time rich" to gain anything, or maybe i have to say, they need to actually work. :D

[@Healitnow]

Why is the mining needed at all. There must be another way that does not pollute?

[@treayed]

My only quibble is it is not accurate to compare the Visa transaction estimate as presented. The power consumption would need to be inclusive of reconciliation of all the financial accounts involved in the Visa transaction.

[@siloton]

@@NANA-dd4fl And where do you count your concrete for offices and server rooms of miners, wallet providers, exchanges, etc? Where is concrete for companies providing loans ( that now are handled by banks and will be necessary always ) heh?

[@deepresearch_]

1.Compare it to the energy needed for mining the gold. 2.Ask yourself what value does BTC brings with all this energy consumption and then ask yourself it's a lot or not. Decentralization, freedom from institutional, economic violence are available thanks to blockchain technology.

[@evaldaszmitra7322]

Keeping the difficulty high just so the block is generated at an arbitrary rate of 1 per 10 minutes and limiting the size of a block to an arbitrary size is fundamentally a bad idea.

[@dexterdextrow7248]

Care to elaborate or is that just a unsubstantiated opinion?

[@evaldaszmitra7322]

@@dexterdextrow7248 Well it's obvious isn't it? This keeps transaction throughput low and thus the prices high prohibiting mass adoption. Lightning network help of course, but doesn't solve the problem completely. These criticisms are common and solutions have been proposed like adaptive difficulty, adaptive block size etc. I haven't checked but I think some other blockchains have implemented this and Btc has proposals for it.

[@dexterdextrow7248]

@@evaldaszmitra7322 I'm not sure mass adoption was the goal of bitcoin to begin with, seeing as it has a arbitrary max amount of possible generated currency, making adaption inherently limited. But I've never been particularly interested in cryptocurrency to begin with, so I can't say I speak with any sort of authority in the subject.

[@evaldaszmitra7322]

@@dexterdextrow7248 I am a bit of a skeptic on crypto, but I think it's an interesting concept (I am a software engineer). Basically: limited amount prevents inflation, causes deflation which is not a good thing for the economy. It's only value is if it's utilized as currency. "Backed by computational work" is not as good as backed by government. You cannot fundamentally exchange BTC to something else. It's current utility is: Speculation tool Money laundering tool Back market tool

[@dexterdextrow7248]

@@evaldaszmitra7322 as much I've figured, what I wasn't certain of is as to why you think that a arbitrary difficulty and set value per block chain is problematic.

[@solbrass]

hi every one i understand they the miners are aiming for new blocks and need cumputing power. back in the days i was invalved in the seti screen saver i understood then what it was they where looking for now i am lost . what are they are looking for?

[@loganholmberg2295]

If people start to stop mining a crypto currency could it get to a point where transactions could no longer happen because theres not enough compute power processing the ledger? There buy rendering the currency useless?

[@sleeptyper]

When computing power goes down, the number of start zeros in the hash goes down too - reducing the demand for computing power.

[@compwiz00]

The difficulty automatically adjusts. It would work fine even if 90% of the miners stopped, though it would be really slow for a while until the protocol adapted and reduced the difficulty so that a block is found every ten minutes.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp

[@TheChangeYT]

@@compwiz00 although this would raise a stability/ controlling problem if then 1 entity gets more than 50% of the mining capacity

[@shadbakht]

Excellent

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp.

[@bencheevers6693]

I read the description and it has to be flawed or I don't understand something, it says that every transaction costs 700 kwh to process, that would make the cost of every transaction 100$ usd, every block has 2000 transactions which would make the cost 200000 dollars, every block gives 6.5 bitcoin and bitcoin costs 30k which gives 195k, it seems like they arrived at their number this way by dividing the price of the rewards of a block of bitoin by number of transactions in that block and then finding out how much that cost would pay for in power. That would mean that mining would return very closely what it costs in power but this isn't the case. I've also seen on google that it's not 700 kwh but 1500 and that wouldn't make any sense at all, the power cost to return is about 10% in first world countries but in industrial China where power is about 3/5ths it would be even less, like 7 percent so the actual power consumption of every transaction is probably closer to 7% of that 700 kwh figure or 50 kwh. This also makes sense because that's the gas cost of transactions and intuitively if transactions cost the full trading value of bitcoin then they would be worthless.

[@user-zd8op3kl7t]

应该算一算传统金融的能量消耗，会更吃惊。全球银行系统一天的碳排放是多少？

[@7-ten]

My hashrate is the rate at which I smoke hash 🤣

[@rogerket9996]

Excellent info, concise delivery. You've expanded my perspective and understanding as usual. Cheers!

[@jeffsteyn7174]

Let me expand your perspective even more. Bitcoin on a daily basis sends around $7b value. Bitcoin globally uses 120twh a year. Aircon in the US alone uses 264twh. Global televisions use 440twh. Every single step forward the human race has taken has closely been tied to energy usage. Energy usage is not a bad thing it is part of progress. But this is typical of the anti bitcoin crowd. Will complain that 10minutes is to long but will happily stand in line at his bank to send money by swift and then wait 5 days for it to actually be sent. They will complain about bitcoin using to much energy while watching the Kardashians to the tune of 440twh a year. They will complain about criminals using bitcoin while happily carry and use cash. It's really laughable

[@hsharma3933]

Also you spelled mining wrong at 12:05

[@AKA0987]

So it takes more energy to run one bitcoin transaction than to charge a Tesla model S 7 times. How is that sustainable?

[@nicomal]

I love crypto, but this is literally not sustainable. We are trying to make a better world though BTC, this is not what is happening, we are getting greedier that the central banks. An alternatives most soar, but we have to be there to support it, the proof of stake of ETH, and the others. I also ran into this coin yesterday (I actually heard an interview), but after watching this video, this feels more relevant, a new coin Chia, different technology, different approach. They have something call proof of time and proof of something else (capacity I think) It's not market ready yet (they only have a website now, and the software to mine, which they call farm, because is orders of magnitude less energy intensive than the bitcoin blockchain), but I hope it succeeds. They even have a green paper (alongside its white paper).

[@eckee]

No one is trying to make a better world through BTC, everyone is trying to be rich. Who said that?

[@nicomal]

@@eckee Watch Andreas Antonopoulos videos.

[@eckee]

@@nicomal Why? Did he say that? If so, he’s completely wrong.

[@nicomal]

@@eckee if Bitcoin was greed for greed sake if would’ve died a long time ago. There’s a real need for it, and a real problem that it solves. There are such projects in crypto, but they usually tank, like one coin, that really was greed incarnated, there was nothing behind it, just speeches and MLM. One problem BTC solves is inflation, it is scarce and a great keeper of value (the US, for instance, printed last year 23% of all the money they have ever printed, and the printers are working even more this year). 1974 Nobel economics prize winner FA Hayek said in 1984 “I don’t believe we shall ever have a good money again before we take the thing out of the hands of government... all we can do, is by some sly rondabout way, introduce something that they can’t stop”. BTC may or may not be what he wanted, but it’s close. I think a different crypto will surge to rule them all, it just need the right story. But listen to andreas antonopoulos chats, there is more to it.

[@ovalwingnut]

OUT$TANDING 👍😎

[@warpigs330]

Really enjoyed this video. Often people who are into technology don't think through the impacts of their innovations. Would love to see more on the social impact of technology, and who that impacts the most. We don't see enough of the people whose lives are most affected by these decisions.

[@gebali]

Las Vegas uses about the same power. I would argue that gabling is less good for society than financial freedom and the choice of people anywhere in the world to be their own bank. After Ethereum moves its consensus model from mining to staking, bitcoin will follow suit a year or three later. Remember, it is software and can always be improved. The currentl financial systems create enormous inequality and suffering worldwide. Bitcoin (in part) was created to help resolve some of those ills. I have done much research on on both sides of the coin and expect Bitcoin to outlive fiat currencies.

[@sumduma55]

@@gebali while similar on the surface, gambling is not the same as investment or the base of a currency. It's a lot easier to justify gambling as a recreation or entertainment. It can dissappear with a lot less negative outward impact.

[@nukiradio]

@@gebali its important to remember that the existence of crypto does not ensure financial freedom. In 20 years time, all the people who couldn't afford capital now wont be able to afford crypto then, and will be right back where they started. "Crypto.com" has already started selling Bitcoin CreditCards. If we dont learn from our history, it will repeat itself in HD.

[@bencheevers6693]

I read the description and it has to be flawed or I don't understand something, it says that every transaction costs 700 kwh to process, that would make the cost of every transaction 100$ usd, every block has 2000 transactions which would make the cost 200000 dollars, every block gives 6.5 bitcoin and bitcoin costs 30k which gives 195k, it seems like they arrived at their number this way by dividing the price of the rewards of a block of bitoin by number of transactions in that block and then finding out how much that cost would pay for in power. That would mean that mining would return very closely what it costs in power but this isn't the case. I've also seen on google that it's not 700 kwh but 1500 and that wouldn't make any sense at all, the power cost to return is about 10% in first world countries but in industrial China where power is about 3/5ths it would be even less, like 7 percent so the actual power consumption of every transaction is probably closer to 7% of that 700 kwh figure or 50 kwh. This also makes sense because that's the gas cost of transactions and intuitively if transactions cost the full trading value of bitcoin then they would be worthless.

[@artemaung5274]

The cheapest energy contracts currently are solar (in some regions as cheap as 2 cents per kWh for 20-year contract) and wind - about 3-4cents in some areas, like Wyoming. compare that with brand new coal plants - 6 cents per kWh. Now as it gets cheaper it's been estimated that by the year 2025 it'll be cheaper to build NEW solar plant than even maintaining EXISTING coal plant in most parts of the world. It's quite possible that coal will disappear entirely by then because it won't be able to compete with other power sources. The only thing that will be left is oil and natural gas - far less environmentally damaging. And at some point we might finally crack fusion energy. This topic is more complicated than people think.

[@putyograsseson]

it’s the currently trending fud narrative :)

[@andriisenkiv9898]

Secret key and Private key in cryptography are completely different things, mate

[@gustavobogarin2334]

Yeah, but there are articles that claim they can be used indistinctly (if you look in Google), I just watched another video saying the same thing, I never heard of such thing it though.

[@MartinHabovstiak]

@@gustavobogarin2334 RSA keys look same and it doesn't matter which is which. Bitcoin doesn't use RSA but ECDSA, where it matters which is which.

[@andriisenkiv9898]

@@MartinHabovstiak yeah, but that's the difference between private and public key in an asymmetric encryption. My point is that he used term "secret", which is usually used in symmetric encryptions such as DES or AES.

[@MartinHabovstiak]

@@andriisenkiv9898 OMG, I misread your original comment. Sorry. Yes, the convention is to use private key in asymmetric encryption and shared secret in symmetric.

[@jeffsteyn7174]

What do you expect of bitcoin haters. As usual talking of things they don't understand.

[@pdbla]

I don’t think that comparing the energy consumption of 1 company (eg. VISA) that wouldn’t work without a global infrastructure for final settlement makes much sense and leads to misunderstandings. Like the comparison from the energy consumption of an e-bike (without the costs of logistics around it for production) and a car. In my eyes, it is efficient enough having a GLOBAL monetary system that consumes the equivalent amount of energy of a single country. Efficiency is a moving target. Having a global monetary system based on oil and weapons is not better nor more efficient. The idea is to replace war, embargoes and oil with a more efficient system that might not be the most efficient one, but that can be improved in a more decentralized and peaceful manner.

[@MartinHabovstiak]

Exactly! The video made several grave mistakes. 🙁

[@joschjosch8859]

Bitcoin is a great idea, but it's not really functional over the next decades. Our monetary system has two major problems. 1. FIAT money can't really work out much longer than 30 years without a massive crash, after 100 years there is no way that there is anything of a stable currencie left. 2. We need to back up cash with gold. Physical money is way better, remember Greece. Nobody had cash reserves at home and the availability of the money was limited. So people had to watch their money loosing it's worth daily.

[@veduci22]

Cryptocurrency doesn't really change the fundamentals of economic cycle. Stablecoins could be used as a financial tool for stabilizing financial markets while standard cryptocurrencies and CBDC have its fair share of issues...

[@joeshmoe9940]

So when mining is no longer profitable or sustainable, there are no more block chain additions and no more bitcoin? Or will existing bitcoin owners have to pay increasing amounts of bitcoin to give an incentive for folks to keep these nodes running - so it spirals downward in value over the next couple centuries?

[@TheBellKeeper]

hashrate goes down, so it becomes easier to mine for smaller operations. when there is no more bitcoin to mine, yes its just fees. other cryptocurrencies approach this problem in different ways like monero's tail emission. bitcoin maximalists may claim large stakeholders such as governments would offer subsidy to keep it running.

[@nox_chan]

I only deal in simple commodities: brass lead and copper

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to us on a good trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Whats@pp.

[@ChristopherGoggans]

High velocity lead and copper? ;-)

[@Br0nyAn0myn0u5]

Although I did learn with this video, I feel that you could have done a better job with relating your numbers. For instance, why not show more data with power consumption by country with their percentages? You put the percentage for Bitcoin mining but failed to relate that percentage to that of other countries the way you related the power consumption values. You also didn't explain the 2^32/600 in the equation you showed around 8:10.

[@jamestheotherone742]

Because that information is probably impossible to get or would inaccurate, misleading, or expensive to get. This isn't exactly a thesis paper ya' know.

[@MartinHabovstiak]

Because that information is factually incorrect and it could be author attempting to look smart while actually lying. But it could also be a mistake. 🙂

[@spraynpray]

It's amazing that people are willing to destroy the planet to undermine and/or avoid the government. So much time and effort spent by so many people just because our leaders are purely malevolent.

[@fusta6208]

Lol, I thought the future was supposed to be more efficient.

[@SudaNIm103]

That’s enough power to send every DeLorean ever made to 1985 and back to the future!

[@jacekpiterow900]

Does anybody have a video of Bitcoin influence on economic stability of a country? Fiat value can be adjusted to help regulate economy, how will it look like if a country switches to the Bitcoin?

[@trader2137]

nobody will switch to a bitcoin, goverments will ban it

[@joefox9875]

@@trader2137 It's very difficult to ban. As this video says, China is where 50% of the world's bitcoin is mined, and it's banned in China!

[@trader2137]

@@joefox9875 73% is mined in china, and i wonder how its possible there, but i guess their Gov doesnt really care, although you can ban it, make it illegal and prosecutable and its not that hard to do, BTC is what finnances crime and terrorism so its beneficial to do so

[@sandyj342]

Basically an AI or Quantum computer can break the security way before the time this reaches maturity. Also the big investors know the risks of these limits and this is not practical solution at all.

[@Jechto1999]

You know that conventional banking also relies on SHA256+ to confirm transactions. So the day the quantum computer breaks SHA256 is the day most cryptography ceases to be usable, not just bitcoin. And then some new cryptography will need to be invented, which would be then be used by both the bitcoin and banking world. Lastly, what does AI have to do with this. Breaking SHA is quite literally just bruteforce, no intelligence is needed.

[@sandyj342]

@@Jechto1999 AI is just that at the moment. No cognitive abilities and just running algorithms and processes faster than us. Bit Coin is just a big waste with the environmental impact if the aim is to replace conventional banking. Do you think any government will allow a truly anonymous system over which they have no control ? The only reason they want us to trust a digital system is so they can ditch gold. No physical asset = no accountability and more control.

[@Jechto1999]

@@sandyj342 Bitcoin is factually power inefficient and not good for the enviroment. But that does not necessarily mean it's a waste of power though. If i spend 20000$ on electricity to mine 1 bitcoin, worth 50000$, did i waste that 20000$ of electricity? No not really since i made 30000$. Lastly, your original claim seems to rely that is is bad for BTC to rely on SHA256+. Which if that's the case then all of cryptography is bad, because it relies on a cryptographic functions. The day the cryptographic hash funcion is cracked by bruteforce, AI or whatever. It will be bad for EVERYONE. not just crypto. All passwords, emails, bank details etc.. will be available for viewing since anyone could then just walk straight into and secure banking website.

[@TheBellKeeper]

QRL, Quantum Resistant Ledger has already taken steps to be quantum computer resistant. Most coins will be screwed in the far future, but it has also been solved for at least that niche coin.

[@sandyj342]

@@Jechto1999 If you spend 20000$ on electricity to mine 1 bit coin worth 50000$ today, there is a huge environmental impact. Doesnt matter you earned 30000$, its at a cost. I just told about security and privacy as that is one of the key benefits. If its as vulnerable as conventional transaction then SHA256 is the weakest link for BC.

[@ajm5753]

So without transactions then there will be no mining of Bitcoin

[@Spookyhoobster]

It's kind of ingenious. If there's no transactions that means there's no demand for Bitcoin, so there's no reason for anyone to mine any. So the technical reasoning falls right in line with the social reasoning.

[@happyman6102]

No transactions are needed to mine blocks, a block can be mined with no transactions, but that miner would also get no fees, just the block reward. The transactions do NOT make mining the block (find a valid nonce) more difficult. So adding transactions is a costless way for the miner to increase their reward for mining the block.

[@Chilledoutredhead]

excellent video, but i dont think ill ever understand bitcoin :D

[@joefox9875]

The ideas underpinning bitcoin are very different from how we normally think. After the invention of the Internet, it took twenty years for cryptocurrency to be created. The video skimmed over them far too quickly. No one will understand those ideas unless they have done prior reading (or look them up afterwards).

[@WMTeWu]

I don't think this video was trying to explain bitcoin. It was trying to explain that whatever is the mechanism behind bitcoin, this mechanism necessarily require a lot of energy, and correspondingly a lot of CO2 to be pumped to our atmosphere.

[@learning_with_irving4266]

Never say never

[@cmswimz]

@@WMTeWu Most miners run off surplus energy sources.

[@WMTeWu]

​@@cmswimz And they have a way to measure when there is surplus energy in the grid. And if there is no surplus energy generated, they turn off their money making machines. If you have any more information about this being the case, please share the sources, as this seems quite interesting if not unlikely.

[@hsharma3933]

Bitcoin is predominantly asic dominant. You can’t really mine btc with GPUs today. They’re not powerful enough to yield profit, so your lower limit calculation is accurate irl And the power consumption of a country is an acceptable compromise when you consider the fact that it’s a hedge against inflation. Get us back on the gold standard and bitcoin will lose its purpose. Keep nations spending money like it has no value, and bitcoin will continue its trajectory.

[@Purpleturtlehurtler]

Most informative video about bitcoin I've ever seen.

[@CryptoTonight9393]

One day we will have a global reserve crypto currency but it wont be bitcoin. It will most likely be something made by the central banks that they have control of and that govts can more easily regulate. I just hope thisnis traded publicly so the wealth can continue to redistribute.

[@g.hunter8527]

you think the central banks care about wealth distribution? lol, and government will regulate for peoples benefit? the reason everyone is moving into it is to protect their money from the government and the banks...

[@veduci22]

@@g.hunter8527 "the reason everyone is moving into it is to protect their money from the government and the banks..." This was true maybe a decade ago nowadays 99% of growth is fueled by financial speculation...

[@g.hunter8527]

@@veduci22 quite the opposite. a decade ago the value was low compared to 2020 and the banks and institutions were not going anywhere near it, quite the opposite in fact. Theres a reason why their buying into it now on a massive scale, to protect the wealth and move it away from FIAT currency which is quickly losing value, they know exactly what is happening. agree with it or not, its going mainstream now

[@leftysheppey]

"Nonce" in the UK is a slang term for paedophile lol

[@janjansen141]

and to think there's also "miner" there lmao

[@nukiradio]

"So miners go looking for a random pack of Nonces" 😒

[@pup4301]

Well we could always prepare and think ahead for power solutions. Currently thought, we will be alright. So we will continue to mine digital currency.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp

[@pup4301]

@@user-gt8xx8nw3g Monero would be my current recommendation because of its security features.

[@AaronSchwarz42]

Also, operating a small GPU mining rig at home in a cooler area can heat your room with the waste heat, power which you might have put through an electric space heater (apartment) & your already paying for high speed internet that's your not using while sleeping or at work or school or traveling // think of the waste heat as a benefit for home heating //

[@csehszlovakze]

a heat pump (or HVAC with inverter) is far more effective at that

[@imnotsure5931]

I would like to see a second video on the subject. This first one seems to assume a lot of factors. The biggest one being that technology in computing and energy production stagnate over the course of the next 20 years. How would those calculations be altered if current rates of technological advancement continue over the next 20 years?

[@jeffsteyn7174]

Antminer s9 went from use 100w per terahash on a 16nm chip. To the latest s19 that uses 29w per TH on 7nm chip. 5nm chips so far is looking at a drop to 27w per TH. But I expect that to drop by time it goes into production. But these are not the details these "experts" are interested in since is doesn't allow for the bitcoin is evil narrative. Neither does the fact that 76% of miners use renewables. Or that the reason miners pay so little for electricity is because the producer just can't sell the energy.

[@LimitedWard]

Anyone else get an ad for a Visa bitcoin credit card at the end of this video?

[@stachowi]

fantastic, one of the best i've seen on Bitcoin/blockchain, and i've seen a lot

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp

[@MrMischelito]

Needs more views!

[@shemmo]

40 TWh at min. is 2x consumption of Slovakia per year, or i could drive my EV with avg. consumption 16 kWh / 100 km for 25 bn kms each year!!!

[@treayed]

My only quibble is it is not accurate to compare the Visa transaction estimate as presented. The power consumption would need to be inclusive of reconciliation of all the financial accounts involved in the Visa transaction. Also, cash transaction would need to include a distributed average of the power consumption/environmental impact of the life cycle of physical currency. Not saying Bitcoin does not have a high impact but working within IT support for the financial sector, the comparisons are usually grossly underestimated in favor of traditional financial transactions due to using a perceived simplified model of how they happen circa 2000.

[@siloton]

​@@NANA-dd4fl Oh, wallstreet or any alternative would also not exists with bitcoin? LOL

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp.

[@iagokhvipsen8487]

Georgia!!! numba oneeeeeeee

[@Flakester]

No! Taiwan numba one!

[@Phil-D83]

Given its effect on gpu prices and gpu markets, would prefer laws be brought out to crash its value.

[@switchbranch8411]

Bitcoin has been banned every year since 2012. Good luck

[@switchbranch8411]

Never mind the fact that you mining bitcoin isn’t profitable anymore, this isn’t 2017. Altcoins are mined on gpus

[@Phil-D83]

Put a crazy tax or limit its convertability,etc. Forsaken thing ruins gpu prices

[@Jechto1999]

@@Phil-D83 People will just not file their crypto earnings as taxes. And it's quite hard to figure out which wallet belongs to which person unless they link it through an official exchange. This idea of simply taxing it to hell or banning it does not work. You need to put more information on the ever growing energy consumption of BTC, and begin to invest in alternative cryptocurrencies. For example ETH is planning to switch away from Proof of work, to Proof of stake. which would greatly reduce the amount of power consumed by cryptocurrencies.

[@Phil-D83]

@@Jechto1999 make it not acceptable by us banks as tlwas done with foreign gambling winnings,etc

[@pauloseixas5452]

but cant it be solved just by incereasing the energy we extract in todays age by investing heavily on green energy

[@shrimpflea]

This is the 4th or 5th video I've watched about Bitcoin and I still don't understand it.

[@hsharma3933]

Why didn’t you talk about the numerous drawbacks of proof of stake? I respect your other videos on nutrition etc, but this video struck me as one sided. You definitely had an agenda here.

[@yohnyarvis9653]

Can you explain your point of view to a normie plz.

[@heyjohnsmith]

Are the drawbacks of proof of stake worth explaining? noob here..

[@funland108]

Good understanding of the technicalities of how bitcoin works. Zero understanding of macro economics or why bitcoin is needed. You need to compare bitcoin's power consumption with the existing financial system - including governments and militaries needed to enforce the petrodollar. You will find it is small by comparison. In addition, bitcoin is a bearer-bond type asset more comparable to gold. Consider the environmental cost of mining and storing the world's gold - bitcoin is considerably more environmentally friendly. You haven't mentioned layer 2 solutions such as Lightning Network which will add millions of transactions per second to each transaction on the blockchain. Neither have you mentioned the fact that approximately 70% of bitcoin's energy use is from renewables such as hydroelectric and geothermal. It is not just seasonal use of renewables. No mention also of the miners using stranded oil and gas assets to convert methane into less damaging CO2. The principal use of bitcoin is not speculation, it is store of value. Millions of people use it to store their savings very successfully. Millions of people in countries that have unstable currencies or hyperinflation such as Venezuela, Nigeria, Iran use bitcoin to transfer and store value across borders and for trade. Because of all this, I'm going to have to dismiss this as a hit piece. 2/10 must do better research.

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

Make a note 📝 to my trader Andrew on a good crypto trading investment

[@user-gt8xx8nw3g]

+=1=6=8=2=2=1=4=3=0=2=4 Whats@pp

[@ANT-jm4qx]

@@user-gt8xx8nw3g Bot.

[@jasonb7559]

👍👍

[@FlameRat_YehLon]

By the time this video was up, I think China has already depricated all cryptocurrency mining, which means no miner can operate legally. If it wasn't, now it definitely is.

[@csehszlovakze]

emphasis on _legally_ which means that the mining is now done by CCP cronies as the government looks the other way for a cut

[@gcarlson]

Excellent explanation of the Bitcoin process. I've heard a few and yours is one of the best. Assuming that greenhouse gases we generate are having a negative impact on an environment, an environment that has been in constant flux well before mankind even existed.... we would have to compare the direct emissions from bitcoin mining (power which could be handled with modern nuclear power) to not only the visa transaction usage power, but the emissions from all of the cars, airliners, trucks and scooters that carry around all the employees from all the banks and associated institutions that are tied what we all use every day. Dollars, Euros, Yen... Or the amount of energy used to protect the gold in fort Knox, or the impact of the mining process to get that gold. I could go on, but where would I stop? Relatively speaking I'm sure Bitcoin's global impact on the environment verses the impact of the banking industry is miniscule. And btw, guess who doesn't want Bitcoin? Given the fact western society is in, shall we say, a state of flux and some governments are literally just printing money and handing it out... I'm going to express my opinion while I still can and say this is not a problem. And I suspect an agenda.

[@Tadesan]

Idk man. Where would you stop? I agree that the trouble here is the inflation built into the cryptocurrency system which, as is characteristic of inflation, does not actually increase the value of the system.