[doener]

I think the author idealizes a bit strongly here. Internet infrastructure is not a garden, so I don't think the metaphor fits. And the exponentially growing requirements for hardware and power consumption are at least a real challenge - although certainly not as extreme as with proof-of-work blockchains.

[berkes]

I really tried to convey your exact point. That gardening is inneffient. That I'm probably spending more CO2 because I have a rake. My neighbor buys a rake. The other neighbor buys one, etc. All with a footprint. That farmer producing millions of zucchinis probably has one rake. A tiny footprint, compared .

But energy and Co2 make the article even more convoluted. Bitcoin (PoW) even more so. And there's a major difference. In which PoW deliberately burns energy. Whereas the fediverse at least tries to burn as little as possible while remaining decentralized.

[cinntaile]

What does this have to do with blockchains?

[xigoi]

That the energy consumption of Mastodon is negligible in comparison.

[cinntaile]

I took the car to the store, it's not great but it's not as wasteful as proof-of-work blockchains.

What is the point of making irrelevant comparisons is what I'm asking.