Now Loading



This is because the crypto mines of Bitcoin require a huge amount of computer power since the miners have to complete complex puzzles to ensure transactions and create new coins. This process is called "proof of work."

This Monday, major groups of climate activists announced they were trying to remove Bitcoin from the mining process, saying Bitcoin could be 99% green if it switched to a different model, such as "proof of," rather than power. - a deep "proof of work".

Greenpeace USA, the Environmental Working Group and other meteorological organizations launched the campaign on Monday, with plans to run ads in The New York Times, Politico, and elsewhere, as reported for the first time by the Wall Street Journal. Chris Larsen, founder of Ripple, a fintech company behind the rival cryptocurrency and a long-time critic of Bitcoin work evidence, has reportedly donated $ 5 million to the campaign.

The Bitcoin community says this campaign is not the only one - it is impossible. Not only is the campaign unlikely to be successful for a number of reasons, they say, but the evidence-based work model is a big part of why they are so committed to Bitcoin.

Deviation from proof of employment is ‘not real’

Larsen told Bloomberg that his part in the campaign was not "to reduce rivalry," but because of his interest in protecting the environment. He added that Ripple was not involved in the campaign.

While Larsen did not say how he would like Bitcoin to take on proof of performance, he referred to Ethereum's plan to switch to proof of his participation in Twitter during the campaign week, which appears to support that change.

Under stack proof, users verify transactions depending on how many coins they donate, or stakes. This machine uses very little energy, as it makes the mines less efficient.

The only thing this campaign doesn't get, Bitcoiners say, is proof of performance is an important part of the Bitcoin value proposition. They see proof of performance important in blockchain security and international distribution and strongly protect the machine. Most of them do not want any adjustments made.

"The chances that Bitcoin will pass the proof of risk soon are very slim," John Wu, president of Ava Labs, a team supporting the development of the Avalanche blockchain, told Fortune. "Proof of work, while powerful, has been crucial to the philosophy and success of Bitcoin from the beginning."

Wu notes that Satoshi Nakamoto, an anonymous developer of Bitcoin, talks about work evidence in his famous white paper Bitcoin at the beginning of the fourth sentence. "Any proposed change to this key element is very unlikely to pass."

In addition, the transition from working testimony to something like stack proof can ruin miners' income, as they too will expire.

"Miners make money through a high-value business where they invest a lot of money in the mining equipment they use," Jerry Brito, executive director of the DC-based crypto think tank Coin Center, told Fortune. The campaign actually “asks them to switch to a system where, once they upgrade to a new code, all their huge investment becomes in vain.”

Why the Bitcoin community thinks this campaign is 'untrue'

Otherwise, the campaign mistakenly assumes that it would be easy to make this change. Bloomberg reports that "The campaign believes that about 50 key miners, crypto exchanges and major developers have the potential to change the Bitcoin code." Brito says that is not true.

As a separate network, or not controlled by one party or organization, the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) will need to be introduced to the Bitcoin community and voted for in order to be successful. It can take years for all miners, node operators and developers to agree on a BIP and reach an agreement to move forward.

"We've seen this in the past when people say, 'We can go to a few key miners or a few key exchanges, and if they support code conversion, it will happen.'

People like to hear a number so they can visualize what they actually see, but "no," he said. "There has to be a common ground between developers, miners and nodes," or those computer-based computers building the Bitcoin network.

Then there is the real catch: Even if a BIP was not agreed upon, the Bitcoin code would not change automatically. Miners and users of nodes will need to agree to upgrade their software in order to use the new code.

If some miners and nodes agree to use the new code, it could lead to a strong fork, or a situation in which Bitcoin will split into two blocks: The first proof of operation, and the youth following a different set of rules, perhaps proof-stakes. However, proof of blockchain activity will still be available and they will process the transaction.

"You may have a new coin, but you will still have Bitcoin in proof of work," Brito said. “This has happened before. There is a Bitcoin Money forged from Bitcoin. However, what often happens to these coins is that they are not important because there is no interest in them. Interest is in Bitcoin. "

Indeed, "The new rules have never been as successful as the first, and I think the idea of ​​changing Bitcoin today reminds us of the difficulties of this era," Wu said.

Clearly, the campaigners see the mines as bad, as they encourage the removal of evidence of work, which needs to be mined. But to make such a change in Bitcoin, miners will have to make sure they stop doing what they have dedicated their lives to.

source: yahoo

How do you feel about this blog?


Leave a Reply