Energy mining = dead?

[Norihiro]

Don't you think that today's crysis with cryptocoins is happening not only because of the enormous BTC pump, but also because of the fact that "mining" in traditional understanding technologically and mentally is not suitable for such a dynamic and effective thing as the cryptocoin? What do you think about this?
Should we do our best in order to find alternative ways and models of mining in order to revive "mining" or it will be gone forever?

[1714171810]

1714171810

[1714171810]

1714171810

[1714171810]

1714171810

[1714171810]

1714171810

[TerrorFromTheDeep]

I think that crisis of tokens it is not crisis - it is normal thing. It was hype few month ago, when unless tokens pumped to the moon. Now we see real picture of the cryptomarket, nothing will nothing.

[rico666]

Which todays crisis? BTC over $7200.

I do agree, however, that PoW (aka Energy mining) cannot be the way to go in the future, which is why I am interested and involved in working on Proof-of-Capacity:



PoS - while being energy efficient - is quite bad at fair distribution.

[KingScorpio]

I think that crisis of tokens it is not crisis - it is normal thing. It was hype few month ago, when unless tokens pumped to the moon. Now we see real picture of the cryptomarket, nothing will nothing.

bitcoin pump is just an information, in my opinion even a tulpomania.


regards

[Norihiro]

Which todays crisis? BTC over $7200.

I do agree, however, that PoW (aka Energy mining) cannot be the way to go in the future, which is why I am interested and involved in working on Proof-of-Capacity:



PoS - while being energy efficient - is quite bad at fair distribution.

To clarify - I said crysis not in terms of "lack of money" in crypto-sphere. It was about the crysis of ideas - in my opinion, at the current moment we are stuck on the certain point with mass-energy-mining.
I full agree that P-o-c mining is looking far more interesting than energy-based one. Also it may be beneficial in terms of storing data - am I right? Or p-o-c mining considers consumption of all disc space?

[rico666]

To clarify - I said crysis not in terms of "lack of money" in crypto-sphere. It was about the crysis of ideas - in my opinion, at the current moment we are stuck on the certain point with mass-energy-mining.
I full agree that P-o-c mining is looking far more interesting than energy-based one. Also it may be beneficial in terms of storing data - am I right? Or p-o-c mining considers consumption of all disc space?

Ok, so for the "crysis of ideas" I completely agree.

PoC simply consumes as much disk space as you assign to it.
On the other hand people are greedy and so today with e.g. Burst mining, you have to think in Terabytes or tens of Terabytes of miner size.
(Has a nice side effect - your view on hard disk capacity changes radically. I basically threw my 250GB hard drives away in light of as-energy-efficient 10TB drives)

Still, at the moment mining Burst is not profitable, the coin is way too cheap. I was just triggered by the term "energy mining", because IMO - in the long term - we need something that is by orders of magnitude more energy efficient than PoW and PoS cannot be it (see the fairness aspect and the irreversibility of a 51% attack). So for the moment I do not see anything else but PoC to provide that long term perspective.

[Norihiro]

To clarify - I said crysis not in terms of "lack of money" in crypto-sphere. It was about the crysis of ideas - in my opinion, at the current moment we are stuck on the certain point with mass-energy-mining.
I full agree that P-o-c mining is looking far more interesting than energy-based one. Also it may be beneficial in terms of storing data - am I right? Or p-o-c mining considers consumption of all disc space?

Ok, so for the "crysis of ideas" I completely agree.

PoC simply consumes as much disk space as you assign to it.
On the other hand people are greedy and so today with e.g. Burst mining, you have to think in Terabytes or tens of Terabytes of miner size.
(Has a nice side effect - your view on hard disk capacity changes radically. I basically threw my 250GB hard drives away in light of as-energy-efficient 10TB drives)

Still, at the moment mining Burst is not profitable, the coin is way too cheap. I was just triggered by the term "energy mining", because IMO - in the long term - we need something that is by orders of magnitude more energy efficient than PoW and PoS cannot be it (see the fairness aspect and the irreversibility of a 51% attack). So for the moment I do not see anything else but PoC to provide that long term perspective.

I mostly agree with every word.
Maybe I wasn't very accurate with calling PoW - "energy mining", because there are other types which are in dependence with energy in some ways.
I'm also super-interested in experimental types of mining, such as smartphone-based(mining by making calls, for example), cash-back types are interesting as well.

[cryptosipi]

Don't you think that today's crysis with cryptocoins is happening not only because of the enormous BTC pump, but also because of the fact that "mining" in traditional understanding technologically and mentally is not suitable for such a dynamic and effective thing as the cryptocoin? What do you think about this?
Should we do our best in order to find alternative ways and models of mining in order to revive "mining" or it will be gone forever?

Your statement has too much impatience,
I am sorry but need to tell you this is why people lose money.
If we can check our books we have already noted at the end of september that BTG and B2X on oct and now will pump bitcoin.
ANd altcoins will suffer untill fork.
So why are you saying this right now.
Just wait after the fork all things will be normal as usual.

[Skyborn]

The proof of work model isn't really helping out the climate in any way but I don't think proof of stake nor proof of capacity are better solutions either. Think about it if we switched to proof of capacity on the bitcoin network (something that will never happen) everyone would start hoarding HDD's and the prices would rise. Just like GPUs right now. The only difference is that they consume less and are 'better' for the environment.

[rico666]

The proof of work model isn't really helping out the climate in any way but I don't think proof of stake nor proof of capacity are better solutions either. Think about it if we switched to proof of capacity on the bitcoin network (something that will never happen) everyone would start hoarding HDD's and the prices would rise. Just like GPUs right now. The only difference is that they consume less and are 'better' for the environment.

I don't think anyone is assuming Bitcoin would change its consensus method. Bitcoin is way too much held hostage by the Bitcoin miners and the investments they made into their shiny ASICs. Why do you think we had such a long and tiresome scaling debate in the 1st place?

The current network capacity of Burst is around 100 Petabyte. Discussions about pricing effects in the market were held numerous times and in depth.

Let only Seagate (222 Exabyte) and Western Digital (250 Exabyte) shipped in 2015 together almost 5000 times that much. Even if the network grew 50times its current size each year it would still be less than 1% of the yearly market output and therefore not relevant to pricing. The argument isn't only about efficiency. The argument is also about decentralization. Hard disk drives are a commodity and easily available. No preorders from some chinese ASIC manufacturers. The low energy requirements also make it less problematic if your price per KW/h is higher than there in Cheapenergistan.

Obviously I am talking only about the idealistic aspects. As for monetary or "profitability" aspects - that is a whole different matter. I would not recommend anyone to start PoC mining right now.

[Norihiro]

The proof of work model isn't really helping out the climate in any way but I don't think proof of stake nor proof of capacity are better solutions either. Think about it if we switched to proof of capacity on the bitcoin network (something that will never happen) everyone would start hoarding HDD's and the prices would rise. Just like GPUs right now. The only difference is that they consume less and are 'better' for the environment.

I don't think anyone is assuming Bitcoin would change its consensus method. Bitcoin is way too much held hostage by the Bitcoin miners and the investments they made into their shiny ASICs. Why do you think we had such a long and tiresome scaling debate in the 1st place?

The current network capacity of Burst is around 100 Petabyte. Discussions about pricing effects in the market were held numerous times and in depth.

Let only Seagate (222 Exabyte) and Western Digital (250 Exabyte) shipped in 2015 together almost 5000 times that much. Even if the network grew 50times its current size each year it would still be less than 1% of the yearly market output and therefore not relevant to pricing. The argument isn't only about efficiency. The argument is also about decentralization. Hard disk drives are a commodity and easily available. No preorders from some chinese ASIC manufacturers. The low energy requirements also make it less problematic if your price per KW/h is higher than there in Cheapenergistan.

Obviously I am talking only about the idealistic aspects. As for monetary or "profitability" aspects - that is a whole different matter. I would not recommend anyone to start PoC mining right now.

Also, I should state, there is a danger that those who are in possession of enormous data-centers may enter the arena and break the market in terms of PoC. There are not so many GPU big players as DATA players(though they are using their spaces just for storage) on the arena, so it may really become a mess.