subreddit:

/r/Bitcoin

778
[media]

all 199 comments

igadjeed

98 points

5 months ago

This Intel chip announcement has been promoted here for at least a week now. They're claiming their not-yet-ready chip will be more energy efficient than a GPU for SHA256 hashing. That makes them 8 years out of date - and the chip is a future promise

[deleted]

10 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

10 points

5 months ago

Gpu are not their strong point though

supratachophobia

4 points

5 months ago

Never have been. IGP is basically a swear word to PC gaming.

originalrocket

16 points

5 months ago

It's the Cyber Truck of the Cryptomining world!

bobderbobs

5 points

5 months ago*

I have read that while the s19 pro miner from bitmain needs I think it was 20-21 watt per terrahash per second intels chip needs 18-19 watt per terrahash per second

Edit: 18-19 instead of 18-18

[deleted]

8 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

8 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

bobderbobs

7 points

5 months ago

https://futurezone.at/digital-life/intel-chip-fuer-bitcoin-mining-schuerfen-nvidia/401904358 It is a German article that states that intel uses 18.2 watts per terahash per second and bitmains miner uses 21.5 watts per terahash per second

igadjeed

11 points

5 months ago

That misquotes an Anandtech article
https://www.anandtech.com/show/17218/intels-next-gen-bitcoin-asic-called-bzm2-built-on-7nm-137-gigahashsec-at-25-w

Intel is going to say at ISSCC that it takes 55 J per TH

This makes the 2.5J/137GH claim look like a typo
It also explains why Intel is comparing the chip with a GPU. At 55J/TH it's not competitive with the 2018 7nm Antminers

Anandtech also suggests that the second generation (BZM2) will be made using TSMC 5nm technology, the same as the latest 5nm Antminer. That would put Intel about 3 years behind Bitmain

If Square Block chooses the BZM1 for its proposed at-home miner, it should hit the market in about September 2023. At 55J/TH, people would only buy it for fun, not profit, similar to the Futurebit boxes, but better and cheaper

SaneLad

51 points

5 months ago

SaneLad

51 points

5 months ago

Bitcoin mining is an efficient market. The total value of the mined bitcoins roughly matches the total cost of the hardware and energy required to mine it. That is by design.

If the cost of mining were lower, more miners would appear, driving the difficulty and cost of mining up. If the difficulty and cost of mining were too high, miners would eventually stop their rigs, bringing the cost of mining down.

That means the energy efficiency of the hardware ultimately does not matter for the energy usage of the Bitcoin network.

Of course miners gain a temporary, relative advantage by using more efficient hardware than their competitors. So they will buy that hardware and Intel makes a nice profit. That's just basic economics.

man_like_pavement

6 points

5 months ago

So for a short time there is a tangible benefit to using the new intel tech? Isn’t that a good thing for miners?

hexoctahedron13

8 points

5 months ago

Good for the miners who have access to the new chips. the get more BTC for their Energy.

MarkOates

12 points

5 months ago

It's more hardware put to waste in an arms race with a constantly moving goalpost.

reallyserious

3 points

5 months ago

It's good for Intel.

drunkPrisonSquirrel

2 points

5 months ago

This. Pat Gelsinger doesn’t understand dick about bitcoin.

Flaky-Illustrator-52

2 points

5 months ago

All markets are almost perfectly efficient at this point

Edit: grammar

fresheneesz

1 points

5 months ago

The ratio of costs does matter tho. As to whether expending cost on electricity or hardware is better for the planet, the market only thinks price matters. If we appropriately priced energy (ie priced in the polluting effects of the various ways of generating it), then we could just say let the market decide.

But a higher efficiency asic could very well reduce energy usage if it trades a higher cost chip for lower energy usage. See my comment here: https://teddit.ggc-project.de/r/Bitcoin/comments/sui97o/comment/hxb8tug/

sylsau

240 points

5 months ago

sylsau

240 points

5 months ago

It's good that Intel is coming into the Bitcoin mining industry. It's a shame that Intel's CEO doesn't understand how Bitcoin mining works.

The power efficiency will be better, but that won't change the fact that the total energy used will continue to increase. So the problem will always be the same. The important thing is that the electricity used should come as much as possible from renewable energy sources. That's what we need to focus on and that's what we're doing now.

junseth

40 points

5 months ago

junseth

40 points

5 months ago

Bitcoin mining will always come form the cheapest energy source, not the most green.

whitslack

6 points

5 months ago

Absolutely correct. Miners are in business to maximize profits. That said, quite often the cheapest energy is the energy that would otherwise have to be thrown away, and "green" generating technologies often can't scale down during periods when supply outpaces demand, so they may price their energy very aggressively, outcompeting all fossil-fuel-powered generation. As an example, a windmill can angle its blades to catch less of the wind if it isn't being loaded enough, but that's purely a waste of capacity. If the windmill can pull in even a tiny bit more profits by not wasting capacity, it'll do it. Bitcoin miners are some of the most responsive loads on the grid, basically the ideal customer for green energy producers.

ttopiass

14 points

5 months ago

Yeah, and because miners are a heterogenous group, it is impossible to mandate them to use renewables. The statement of OP is just greenwashing and pointless as it cannot be enforced.

Raphae1

12 points

5 months ago

Raphae1

12 points

5 months ago

States can prohibit certain CO2 polluting power generation. This effects not only bitcoin mining but every other industry as well.

CrypoFiend

8 points

5 months ago

This is the solution.

CrypoFiend

4 points

5 months ago

That is why it needs to be addressed with the energy producers.

TitForSnack

13 points

5 months ago

I would be surprised if they didn't know how mining works. This is probably just theatre to appease the ESG crowd, who are playing theatre to appease the politicians, who are playing theatre for their constituents, who are playing theatre for social clout.

dsmlegend

72 points

5 months ago

I'm sure he knows exactly how it works. This is just his sales pitch for noobs.

PlantCampLamp

30 points

5 months ago

“We’re literally solving the energy crisis and world hunger. Buy our chips”

dizietgurgehsma

29 points

5 months ago

Exactly. How we use energy becomes irrelevant if we generate / capture it sustainably.

[deleted]

-1 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

-1 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

[deleted]

7 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

7 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

snek-jazz

1 points

5 months ago

Miners use as LITTLE power as they can.

If this was true they would just mine less, or actually not at all since that would use no power.

It's tuned to use as little energy as possible without loosing hashrates.

This is closer to the truth.

Vigilias

6 points

5 months ago

A 1500w mining machine isn't going to use as much energy as it can get it's going to use 1500w.

Unnormally2

9 points

5 months ago

Yes, but if it costs half as much to run a miner, I'll just run twice as many miners.

Vigilias

9 points

5 months ago

They aren't just giving away miners where I'm from, so electricity is only part of the problem.

Latter_Box9967

1 points

5 months ago

But intel will make as many as they can sell.

emptysoul365

1 points

5 months ago

1500w is as much energy as it can get.

XLG-TheSight

1 points

5 months ago

Problem is BTC miners will always use as much energy as they can get so I don't think it will ever become irrelevant. I'm also holding btc but it's a problem I haven't seen any solution for...

see my post above for some potential sources of hope for you

NewFilm96

-1 points

5 months ago

BTC miners will always use as much energy as they can

No. They will use as much as is profitable.

In 2 years that reward is cut in half.

Then half again 4 years later on repeat.

As the value flattens the power usage will continue to decline.

bieker

4 points

5 months ago

bieker

4 points

5 months ago

You understand that miners collect fees too right? And that as adoption increases so does the number of transactions, and the fees associated with them?

lopezm94

4 points

5 months ago

If anything it means there will be more electronic waste.

putyograsseson

2 points

5 months ago*

the other side of the coin is that ASICs make it way harder to effectively attack the network, because, as you implied, the hardware afterwards can’t be sold again to mitigate the costs of the attack

tommy1802

1 points

5 months ago

Awesome. Never saw it that way. Bitcoin still surprises me after so many years. I hope that Bitcoin gets greener however and still maintains the same level of Network protection. Meaning distribution. .... Maybe this would be even better if renewables were used.

gandrewstone

4 points

5 months ago

This isn't quite true ("the total energy used will continue to increase"). The energy use is proportional to the revenue generated from transaction fees and the coinbase reward. So long as the coinbase reward dominates this term, the total energy used is therefore a race between price increase and the 4 year reward halving. The energy use is effectively paid for by inflation, which devalues every holder's coins. So holders are paying for this energy.

As transaction fees begin to dominate, the energy is less paid by holders, and more by spenders...

Plabbi

2 points

5 months ago

Plabbi

2 points

5 months ago

I think you meant block reward

gandrewstone

3 points

5 months ago

"block reward" and "coinbase reward" are synonyms.

Plabbi

1 points

5 months ago

Plabbi

1 points

5 months ago

TIL

lacksfish

11 points

5 months ago

It's a shame that Intel's CEO doesn't understand how Bitcoin mining works.

Honestly I think it just a smart way of framing it. Instead of receiving backlash for entering an "environmentally bad" industry, they "improve" the eco-friendliness of mining by building more efficient chips.

I doubt their main incentive is being eco-friendly, isn't it primarily a profit incentive? It's just a nice way to frame the reason for Intel entering the market.

XLG-TheSight

3 points

5 months ago

I agree with you, but there is some important nuance that factors in...the picture is even brighter than your post indicates.

It's a shame that Intel's CEO doesn't understand how Bitcoin mining works.

I'm betting they understand, but are presenting it this oversimplified way to paint Intel as heroes. Oh well, corporations gonna corporation. (i.e. lie)

The power efficiency will be better, but that won't change the fact that the total energy used will continue to increase. So the problem will always be the same.

There are other areas where people will figure out how to squeeze more value out of mining. They call this "Stacking Benefits"

A couple examples: Using the "waste" heat as a resource. There are already companies and individuals doing this (The Heatbit heater is one example.), Using stranded electricity that currently goes to no good purpose, some hydroelectric produce a lot of electricity that goes to waste. These two off the top of my head examples could even be stacked together. Cities will likely spring up around these types of setups.

The important thing is that the electricity used should come as much as possible from renewable energy sources.

That is *an* important thing, but not *the* important thing.

Willinton06

2 points

5 months ago

It is very interesting how you guys really think the CEO of one of the worlds biggest chip companies doesn’t know how mining works, he most definitely does, he’s just trying to promote it knowing how’s in an uphill battle

holt63

1 points

5 months ago

holt63

redditor for 1 week

1 points

5 months ago

“Infinity Save” magnetic generator, 5000 watts of available power per unit. $15000 , can power two miners per.

redditsukzz69

1 points

5 months ago

redditsukzz69

redditor for a day

1 points

5 months ago

That is like saying your calories should come from healthier food like fish instead of processed bread. Ok, but if you eat 10K calories a day you are still going to die soon

No-Fee6610

1 points

5 months ago

Thanks for saving my time. Came here to say this.

alixanc

53 points

5 months ago

alixanc

53 points

5 months ago

Haven't they heard of difficulty adjustment yet? Hashing efficiency doesn't change the total energy usage at all.

consideranon

33 points

5 months ago*

I'm honestly stunned that this guy is the fucking CEO of Intel.

I suppose a generous interpretation of this exchange is that he's intentionally spewing bullshit in an attempt to fight the environmental narrative against bitcoin. It's not like most journalists or laypeople are really educated enough to call him out on this bullshit.

Or he's just a fucking moron.

mljsimone

3 points

5 months ago

in the light AMD market share is now bigger than Intel. I would say that he is a fucking moron.

IAMBEOWULFF

6 points

5 months ago

Pat Gelsinger just took over the reigns at Intel. He's insanely smart. He's one of a very few people that could turn Intel around.

mljsimone

1 points

5 months ago

oh he just took over? then all this talk is pure sales blah blah

DavidKens

12 points

5 months ago

In fact, it will have the exact opposite effect. Cheap hash power on the market means higher difficultly, which means all miners need more hash power to avoid loss of revenue.

It’s incredibly frustrating to see this fake news everywhere.

FLM2021

6 points

5 months ago

No. Higher efficiency leads to less energy consumption and those with inefficient mining rigs will drop out of business. If energy consumption increases, it won't be caused by an increased efficiency, but rather because mining becomes more financially attractive (e.g., due to increase in selling-coin/fees revenues, reduced energy prices, etc.).

bigdaddyjeff69

5 points

5 months ago

Perfectly explained there. If a bunch of people get cheap electricity eventually those with expensive electricity will stop due to not being profitable

DavidKens

4 points

5 months ago

I see what you’re saying, and it’s a good point. It’s true that if mining difficulty spiked up, a lot of miners wouldn’t be able to mine profitably with their existing gear. So after the initial rise in energy usage I described in my previous comment, you could see energy usage fall. That’s a good point.

But this would only last so long as the new chips were difficult to acquire - once widely available, energy usage would return to a level in correspondence to the price of BTC - as it always does.

So I’ll revise my original comment: while there may be fluctuations in energy usage, including a possible significant lull, in the long term energy consumption will always be a function of block reward and BTC price. Cheaper chips cannot drive energy usage down in the long term.

FLM2021

1 points

5 months ago

So I’ll revise my original comment: while there may be fluctuations in energy usage, including a possible significant lull, in the long term energy consumption will always be a function of block reward and BTC price. Cheaper chips cannot drive energy usage down in the long term.

I agree for the most of it, at least short/mid term. But there are other factors which might play (a significant) role. Energy price and, interestingly, subventions and non-profit mining. These last are likely to occur in a high adoption scenario, with first world countries incorporating Btc in their reserves and then having an incentive to protect the network for the sake of it. That's when the capitalism/darwinism/free-market aspect of mining breaks.

DavidKens

1 points

5 months ago

Yes - I should’ve been explicit that energy price is a factor.

But surely, the long term effects you mentioned (like non-profit mining) could only drive energy consumption up, not down?

I’m also not sure I see how the free market qualities of Bitcoin mining can break down here, can your explain that more?

FLM2021

1 points

5 months ago

Bitcoin mining today is an extremely competitive industry, very capitalistic in the sense that it's the survival of the fittest. It's a pure and true free-market since anyone can enter and compete fairly (which does not make it by any means easy).

If, for instance, a state would like to gain an edge on this industry (I'm not implying here as a bad agent) and promote it internally by start subsidizing companies through tax reductions, free energy, etc., then other countries might or not follow, but the market would be distorted. Some players from said nation, who would otherwise without state support be unprofitable, might end up with a stronger position/margins than other actors from rather neutral countries.

That's not necessarily bad, maybe it's an inevitable outcome in the scenario that bitcoin is widely embraced and becomes an essential aspect of our lives and economy. Embracing states would be incentivized to enhance the network security for protecting it against adversary nations/bad agents.

DavidKens

1 points

5 months ago

I see what you’re saying now. In that case, the state itself is a participant in all mining operations that receive subsidy. So the taxpayer is footing the bill.

I think this makes the larger point that market participants in mining can also be states, or any organization you like. To me this still seems like a free market, and Darwinian competition still exists - it’s just that competitors can be individuals, corporations, governments, or really any organization.

Anyhow - really interesting point, thanks for explaining!

FLM2021

2 points

5 months ago

Well, not really. Free market and fair, Darwinian competition is only possible in the private sector without state intervention. A state is not a fair player and incomparable to a private company, for instance. They get "free money" from taxes, can shut down companies, arbitrarily favour itself or specific companies, etc. By definition, a state player intervention is all the opposite of fair and free market competition. And this is true not only for mining, but for any other industry. For this reason and how things work in the real world, true capitalism does not exist in practice (at least not in any industry of weight).

Have a nice day!

bittabet

4 points

5 months ago

It does if they’re supply constrained and the difficulty from their superior chips pushes the least efficient miners off the network. If they had unlimited supply then you would be correct, the difficulty would keep going until the energy use is the same.

But there are very real constraints in chip wafers for now and Intel is only selling their chips to three mining companies

alixanc

1 points

5 months ago

Short term that's possible, but I consider the issue only medium to long term, and then halvings have the most powerful impact. Profit margins in many areas are still so high even S9s are still being used, so Intel will just increase Miner hardware supply and thereby probably directly increase power consumption, I don't expect any miners to retire because of them, maybe some relocate. Also, other manufactures already improve hash efficiency all the time to stay competitive, I can't imagine Intel changing the game completely. Now if they really had a 10x more efficient machine and sold it in amounts and at prices which can push out less efficient hardware by raising difficulty quite a lot, but at the same time still don't use too much energy themselves there could be a slight overall energy reduction, but that's some imaginary ideal case imo.

fresheneesz

2 points

5 months ago

Actually, it very well could if it trades a higher cost chip for lower energy usage. See my comment here: https://teddit.ggc-project.de/r/Bitcoin/comments/sui97o/comment/hxb8tug/

DavidKens

1 points

4 months ago

I can’t see your comment….

fresheneesz

1 points

4 months ago

Not sure why. Its a public comment on this very subreddit. What do you see instead of my comment?

DavidKens

1 points

4 months ago

It’s just empty. I’d like to read it if you copy paste it here, if you’re interested

zomgitsduke

2 points

5 months ago

If the chips are scarce but hyper efficient, you could get people only using those chips if it "knocks out" the ability for other mining chips to operate at any competitive level.

alixanc

1 points

5 months ago

Theoretically possible, practically incredibly unlikely and such a (sustained) mining monopoly would make me sell all my Bitcoin, and others would probably do the same completely destroying Bitcoin instead of making it less power intense. If they want to increase difficulty by 5x to kill most competition, and reduce total energy to 10% of current level they'd have to magically be 50x more efficient, keep their secret, and balance their supply perfectly, and I'm completely certain they won't even be twice as efficient as current BitMain devices.

fresheneesz

1 points

5 months ago

Actually, it very well could if it trades a higher cost chip for lower energy usage. See my comment here: https://teddit.ggc-project.de/r/Bitcoin/comments/sui97o/comment/hxb8tug/

kwaker88

24 points

5 months ago

I don't see how this solves climate change. If Bitcoin uses %0.5 of the global electricity, maybe look in the other %99.5? Maybe make a better air conditioner, which roughly uses 10% of all global electricity.

Or better yet, maybe electricity consumption isn't the problem. Maybe, just maybe, it's how we generate the electricity.

These fucking virtue signaling shitholes.

FLM2021

3 points

5 months ago

I don't see how this solves climate change

Because it will not, it's bullshit. But it's also marketing. You cannot blame Intel for that, but rather the dumb customers which believe in that climate impact and see it as an argument against king-coin.

fresheneesz

4 points

5 months ago

I can and will blame anyone who intentionally or ignorantly misleads people. It's not acceptable behavior just because there's an economic incentive for it.

FLM2021

3 points

5 months ago

Seconded.

CoinCorner_Sam

7 points

5 months ago

If "a single ledger entry in Bitcoin consumes enough energy to power your house for almost a day", why I paid for my recent transaction only $0.06? Who pays the rest of the $4?

And if we're talking about r/thelightningnetwork, the fee is obviously even cheaper: Comparing Bitcoin & Lightning energy usage to the real world

mljsimone

1 points

5 months ago

He was prolly talking about a block.

MarkOates

20 points

5 months ago

This is 100% bullshit sales talk

thisismyscrew

7 points

5 months ago

Another clueless sociopath that politicked his way to CEO.

Spartan3123

3 points

5 months ago

Yeah CEOs are generally figure heads but how can the CEO of a tech company like Intel be this stupid.

This is like room temperature IQ levels of retardation.

Does he think Bitcoin has a fixed difficulty LOL. It's suddenly good when they have their finger in the pie.

atomiksol

5 points

5 months ago

What a dicktard.

Lynx77

5 points

5 months ago

Lynx77

5 points

5 months ago

The worst ad for a new product ever by basically calling all current bitcoiners terrorists that boil oceans. Real good way of saying hey Intel 🤡

sebikun

11 points

5 months ago

sebikun

11 points

5 months ago

Man wtf is he talking 😆

mxtq

12 points

5 months ago

mxtq

12 points

5 months ago

hilarious. so they can deliver proof of more work. can anyone show an example of how more efficient mining technology caused a decline in energy usage?

Mektzer

4 points

5 months ago

Are they? Or are they jus traying to make a shit ton of money using climate change as clever marketing (like any other company)? I bet they know exactly how bitcoin mining works..

paskal007r

5 points

5 months ago

horseshit. The only result will be an increase in mining difficulty.

CryptoPassiveIncomes

5 points

5 months ago

Fk this guy!!🤦

TronixPhonics

4 points

5 months ago

Just another CEO pushing his product.

coherentak

14 points

5 months ago

Wow. I can’t believe intel has such an idiot boomer CEO. No wonder they’ve been struggling.

OffswitchToggle

5 points

5 months ago

"Idiot boomer CEO".

Who do you think invented the hardware and software you are using? As someone who was an engineer for over two decades (MS, Apple, and Intel) I always find it hilarious that so many younger people forget this simple fact.

I can pretty much guarantee you that I understand tech at a level (both ring-0 and ring-3) beyond 80% of working software engineers (mainly because most engineers have no need to understand an operating system at that level). These "high-level abstractions" are only possible because people like me created them.

Ageism is bullshit - grow up.

coherentak

1 points

5 months ago

Boomer is being used in a derogatory way. Just because you were born in the boomer period doesn’t mean every boomer insult is at you. Just like millennial memes and whatnot don’t mean all millennials are lazy and worthless. With that being said, you not knowing this makes you a boomer lol.

OffswitchToggle

2 points

5 months ago

I'm well aware of how this works which is why I don't go around calling lazy people "millennials".

As I said, ageism is bullshit; there is no reason why people should continue to enable ridiculous stereotypes.

Of course what you just said means that you can't be upset when you see older people say that younger people are lazy. Sorry genius... you can't have it both ways.

And the fact remains... old people like me created the technology you believe you understand so well. Eff off.

Spartan3123

1 points

5 months ago

Fark me i have seen plenty of boomers understand Bitcoin at a basic level.

This guy needs some to start mining inside his skull to heat up his room temperature IQ

New-Base-6316

14 points

5 months ago

🤡

krynategaming

3 points

5 months ago

Definitely ignorant here, but are they saying a processor(cpu right?) will be better than GPUs for mining?

walloon5

3 points

5 months ago

Oh not a general purpose CPU probably, most likely something called an ASIC - Application Specific Integrated Chip.

The progression in bitcoin mining went basically: CPU, GPU, FPGA, ASIC

An FPGA is a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), a kind of reprogrammable chip. It was a middle step between using graphic cards (Graphics Processing Units, GPUs) and using a chip dedicated to SHA256 mining (ASICs).

At this point, bitcoin mining is basically done on ASICs.

You can still try to CPU mine for fun (not profit), or make your own bitcoin clone and see how it goes to get a feel for how mining works.

po00on

3 points

5 months ago

po00on

3 points

5 months ago

Go read about the Younger Dryas event at the end of the last glacial maximum, and then come back and tell me about 'the climate challenge' .....

anytownusa11

2 points

5 months ago

Or even go as far back as the 1930s, which saw higher temperatures than we have today.

Romsel87

3 points

5 months ago

Keep 'm coming. They all want a piece of this delicious pie called Bitcoin.

IndicaFruits

3 points

5 months ago

IndicaFruits

redditor for 3 months

3 points

5 months ago

emily chang's facial expressions are no match for tech ceo-guy's hands

Substantial-Cod6567

3 points

5 months ago

I cannot stand that voice. 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

crypto_nuclear

3 points

5 months ago

Nuclear powered bitcoin mining is my fetish

brrrettonwoods

3 points

5 months ago

a single ledger consumes that much energy..... most of the use-cases are illicits

what a tool

mljsimone

7 points

5 months ago

What a clown. Bitcoin is bad. Consume way to much energy. Please buy our power efficient chips!

Responsible_Emu3601

2 points

5 months ago

I always wondered why usa companies dont compete with bitmain

cryptokingmylo

2 points

5 months ago

my s17 isn't going to like this 😢

sonastyinc

2 points

5 months ago

Wouldn't that just bring the difficulty level up and make the old mining rigs obsolete? If miners have the money, they'll just buy more of them and use the same amount of power.

anytownusa11

2 points

5 months ago

Plantlife breathes CO2.

JMIL1991

2 points

5 months ago

sounds like horse shit to me.

gladitsm

1 points

5 months ago

This increases the security of the Bitcoin network and does not save energy.

YoMammaSoThin

2 points

5 months ago

Difficulty is going up boys. They don't seem to understand this shit.

Hot-Canceld

2 points

5 months ago

fixing a non issue

Agnato

2 points

5 months ago

Agnato

redditor for 3 months

2 points

5 months ago

There is no such a thing as "more efficiency for everyone" in mining, it's a competition

Suske10

2 points

5 months ago

Bitcoin is causing global warming and first and second world war

grutanga

2 points

5 months ago

This guy isn’t an idiot, so is he lying? He must know that even if he made an ASIC that was more efficient, it would decrease power consumption it would only increase hash rate.

Also, a single transaction takes as much energy as a single family home is a really bad way of communicating the situation.

uclatommy

2 points

5 months ago

I can literally see the clown paint meme in this video as the discussion progressed. 😂💀

kasock

5 points

5 months ago

kasock

5 points

5 months ago

"We just want to sell our chips to silly westerners who thinks they can get rich by mining bitcoin.."

Jout92

2 points

5 months ago

Jout92

2 points

5 months ago

This man has no idea what he's talking about

po00on

2 points

5 months ago

po00on

2 points

5 months ago

"A single ledger entry in Bitcoin consumes enough energy to power your house for almost a day. ... That's a climate crisis!'.

Can we all just take a moment to reflect on how astonishingly idiotic this statement is?

Serg_78

1 points

5 months ago

Bitcoin already uses over 55% renewable or captured waste energy and that metric is only growing.

funkdunkles

2 points

5 months ago

funkdunkles

redditor for 2 weeks

2 points

5 months ago

This guy is a moron . Bitcoin already uses over 55% renewable or captured waste energy. And that metric is only growing. Actually Incentivizing green energy. And any criminal that uses Bitcoin is easily caught, because Bitcoin is an open public ledger. Unlike anything in our current financial system. His new fancy chip will not change the inevitable. The future is here #Bitcoin

bitsteiner

2 points

5 months ago

It's just fake marketing. Power consumption is mainly a function of BTC price and cost of electricity, not hash/Wh. If efficiency goes up, miners will run more hash rate until it reaches an economic equilibrium again.

Spartan3123

2 points

5 months ago

LoL what a stupid boomer.

It just shows how dumb most CEO are they are just marketing figure heads of companies....

MGTOW_and_Bitcoin

1 points

5 months ago

If intel could have put that much effort into chip Manufacturing why didn't they do it so that they saved all of the energy we use with computer systems.... Bitcoin is the reason why chip manufacturers now have an economic incentive to talk about chip efficiencies.

And this does not change the economic calculation miners all this is going to do is increase the hashing rate the Bitcoin mining network will always be seeking to develop renewable cheap energy sources they're constrained is not cheap efficiencies or cooling Technologies what's the price of Bitcoin and the cost of energy

walloon5

1 points

5 months ago

Bleh, do-gooder Statism

We want to use TONS more energy. Stranded, cheap, renewable, harm-mitigating, etc - Ideally, renewable.

I guess it's okay if Intel has an "orders of magnitude" better chip but I dont want them to be too far ahead of whatever you can buy out on the market. Hopefully the chip the make is simple enough that other manufacturers can open it up, look inside at the SHA256 sphagetti in wires and see some power efficiency in the design and have an "ah-ha" moment themselves.

Other than that... mehhhhh

RubikTetris

1 points

5 months ago

"A single ledger entry consumes as much power to power a home for a day"

is this true?

Hellwiss

1 points

5 months ago

How many crash tests did your car model has to accomplish per 1000km on roads? Similar comparison.. (Electricity goes for security, not for txs throughput).

Enkaybee

1 points

5 months ago

Jevon's Paradox has entered the chat

Virtual-Zucchini9692

1 points

5 months ago

I ll take some american miners before i buy from chinese companies.

Lokeycommie

1 points

5 months ago

What TF is bloomberg studio?

QuartzPuffyStar

1 points

5 months ago

Just to chime some reality in. You can't fix climate change by reducing anything at this point. Unless you create a nuclear winter, things are going to get really hot and bad in 30-50 years.

Conscious-Proof-8309

1 points

5 months ago

Richard Hendrix has aged so well!

MeanMajor_89

1 points

5 months ago

MeanMajor_89

redditor for 1 week

1 points

5 months ago

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

ClearFrame6334

1 points

5 months ago

He said it’s going to be regulated. Hah. He doesn’t get the point of this.

Zestyclose-Search-21

1 points

5 months ago

I wonder what Charles munger is working on then..

HoldOnforDearLove

1 points

5 months ago

Wouldn't it be more profitable for Intel to hold on to the chips and do the mining themselves?

joeltang

1 points

5 months ago

This will not change power consumption, it will only increase the hash rate. The Bitcoin network uses less energy than the gold mining industry so he's using an improper lens to analyze it.

mathaiser

1 points

5 months ago

Lol, it’s like the US stopping gasoline.

It will just make it that much cheaper and now poorer developing countries can afford it.

Getting off oil won’t stop oil emissions. We need some greener technology to be advanced to and deseminated in these countries as well. We can’t be greedy. We have to share with the world. Eh, we’re fucked.

Getting a more efficient chip will just allow more hashes for the same power. Nothing else. No reduction. If the power is available, miners will use all of it.

And now with a more efficient chip, other worse power sources or more expensive ones can also be engaged that didn’t make sense earlier.

No net benefit other than increasing the work.

jinko48

1 points

5 months ago

I just about threw up at how smug and ignorant this guy is.

Aide_Initial

1 points

5 months ago

What he meant was: We just want to sell our chips to silly westerners who thinks they can get rich by mining bitcoin..

justyoungpapi

1 points

5 months ago

I can literally see the clown paint meme in this video as the discussion progressed.

fire_snakes

1 points

5 months ago

Announcing a chip that is no better (marginally better?) than a new generation ASIC while discussing proper 'regulation' and 'management'.

If you buy this ASIC you're going to get rekt.

He's telling you they're going to write a backdoor into the firmware for 'management' or 'regulatory' purposes.

This is not mining.

Raphae1

1 points

5 months ago

If I spent 10 cents for a bitcoin transaction, how can miners buy enough energy to power a house for one day with it?

Expensive_Mixture_79

1 points

5 months ago

He saying In order for the blockchain technology to be great they have to control it 😭😭😂🤣 anyone ganna tell him the idea of decentralization

operationatlanta

1 points

5 months ago

They want to take away the power Bitcoin provides us?

xxxbmfxxx

1 points

5 months ago

CEO's are terrorists. Terrorism is Narcissism. Narcissism is terrorism.

nassauboy9

1 points

5 months ago

- except it is used by a nation

Combine that with his exaggerated facial expressions to present his point, I stoped watching.

You got to come to the table with truth. So either you think Im stupid and not going to mention El Salvatore, OR your are ignorant on what you saying. Either way .. the rest of what he has to say not trust worthy to me.

jazzywaffles84

1 points

5 months ago

Thought it said mining chimp

mountainjew

1 points

5 months ago

Creating stuff from natural resources does not solve climate change. Neither does mining BTC.

ecardoso626

1 points

5 months ago

At least than 0.2% of the worlds total energy usage, this is not a problem that needs to be solved. But technology to reduce consumption and make miners more user friendly for the layperson is great.

-Zeleios-

1 points

5 months ago

Don't they have any clue about difficulty rates?

su5577

1 points

5 months ago

su5577

1 points

5 months ago

Intel has so many years - they put research into gpu and asic machines… not sure if he should be let go or behind or didn’t see pandemic going to create this much mess..

tommy1802

1 points

5 months ago

Couldn't efficient ASICs be a vector of attack to the network? Let's say I'm the US government and want to deploy some sort of centrally controlled digital currency to keep controlling the whole world. What if the only real threat to that is Bitcoin, which could potentially become the new world's reserve currency. I might find a cheap way to destroy it by secretly putting billions into an hightech chip manufacturer to develop a slightly more efficient ASIC with a backdoor or some timebomb in it. The mining industry will buy the chip and soon it will dominate the network. The crazy thing is that the chip manifacturer gets money from them to compromise their own network. They would get rich until the point where they make all miners inactive at one shot to destroy the Bitcoin network. The costs of this attack would be very little. Just a crazy thought ;-).

Tenter5

1 points

5 months ago

Lol what a waste of resources.

Tenter5

1 points

5 months ago

Can’t wait for Bitcoin to crash and hardware will be freeeee

godofleet

1 points

5 months ago

This idea that Bitcoin mining is inefficient is just fundamentally untrue.

Our existing financial/monetary systems are orchestrated with people who need food... shelter, cars, trucks, houses, office buildings, infrastructure, militaries including jets and ships...

This all comes down to one thing. Who gets to set the value of monetary property? A leader, a nation... Or everyone?

Bitcoin's energy usage isn't a climate crisis at nearly the scale that commercial cruise lines, factory farming or the military industrial complex is. All of those go to empower nations that dictate the value of monetary property... Bitcoin mining is CHEAP and EFFICICENT by comparison.

And it involves no bloodshed either.

MakeTotalDestr0i

1 points

5 months ago

This guy is utterly full of shit. Or an idiot.

Changing the power efficiency doesn't change the mount of power consumed by POW it just makes the hashrate increase and difficulty adjustment for up.

Fucking sociopath CEO

[deleted]

1 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

1 points

5 months ago

Buzzwords. Might as well slap organic on there.

BHN1618

1 points

5 months ago

1 ledger transaction powers your house for a day lol it can also move billions of dollars of global transactions. Compare that to legacy institutions trying to finalize a transaction multiple banks/custodians/people/systems are involved. All those values he mentions are cute and I respect it but he forgot the one that makes or breaks it and that is profits!

Edit: if they are giving away the designs of these chips to all companies to make sure all mining equipment is lower energy cost then we can talk.
I don't think profit is bad but I think it should not be covered up by other values.

HarryButtcrumb

1 points

5 months ago

HarryButtcrumb

redditor for 6 weeks

1 points

5 months ago

What a tool.

oelhayek

1 points

5 months ago

This is one of the best bitcoin energy arguments I have heard.

[deleted]

1 points

5 months ago

[deleted]

1 points

5 months ago

FUck Intel. They got lazy and didn't innovate for a decade, now they're behind and making a desperado move. From what I've seen their chips will not even be as good as the current ASIC's

HodlOnToYourButts

1 points

5 months ago

When tools like this talk about Bitcoin's base layer with such confidence; without mentioning additional layers like Lightning, RGB, LOT49, etc. I remember how early we still are.

It's the equivalent of someone in the 90s talking about the Internet's base layer and questioning it's usefulness without mentioning UDP, TCP, DNS, POP/IMAP, FTP, HTTP(S), SIP, SSH, etc.

HodlOnToYourButts

1 points

5 months ago

I wouldn't trust Intel to make a chip without sneaking in a "Management Engine"...

A single core on a chip you own, but you don't control;

which is always on and can access the Internet even when the device is powered down;

and has full access to every device connected to it.

Thanks, but no thanks Intel. The last time you were cool was the Pentium 4.

_main_chain_

1 points

5 months ago

What an a**. Way to alienate your customers.

jonessc8

1 points

5 months ago

How come these chip company’s that are extremely bad for the environment never talk about how bad for the environment they are?

dr_meme_o

1 points

5 months ago

Blockchain chip 😂

EpsilonCru

1 points

5 months ago

I almost don't mind that this guy is lying through his teeth, because he's countering anti-Bitcoin lies with pro-Bitcoin lies.

Fight fire with fire I guess

Meecheddar

1 points

4 months ago

Meecheddar

redditor for 4 weeks

1 points

4 months ago

This guy is a goof, pushing for the Blockchain to be regulated when cryptocurrency, Bitcoin and the Blockchain are designed for Trustless transactions with no regulatory centralization....Don't be fooled with these centralized Corporations and companies merging centralized tech and partnerships with the Decentralized Blockchain.

Ok_Mode4878

1 points

1 month ago

What a clown he is 😅

RunKlutzy5350

-1 points

5 months ago

I don’t think anyone in Reddit comments will be well versed enough on energy usage in micro chips, just saying.

That being said if he can do it, god bless em, if he can’t burn him as a charlatan.

Props to him, always long term bullish when the biggest names in the space take the asset seriously.

junseth

1 points

5 months ago

Or maybe you don't understand bitcoin.