|
|
|
|
|
by danuker
1472 days ago
|
|
> Please note that the environment FUD has been refuted many, many times over. And here you are making a blanket statement without backing it up with evidence. Bitcoin spends more than $1M/hr through proof-of-work, https://www.crypto51.app/ , essentially out-spending any doublespenders. This is wasteful. If the inflationary reward were reduced or eliminated, the transaction fees were more in line with the externalities. But mining budget would also drop, which means less security (which means more waiting for large transfers to gain additional confirmations). As such, a "Bitcoin Green" fork with reduced mining rewards would be very welcome by me at least. |
|
https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/03/05/the-frustrating...
PoW security is a vector, and doesn't flip from secure to insecure at some specific point. A gradual reduction in mining hash rate doesn't render the chain noticeably less secure.
Feel free to fork Bitcoin and use it as an alternative. Please note that this has been done in the past, and will probably be done in the future. There is a reason why the economic majority remain with Bitcoin, even though PoW isn't energy neutral.