Author: Devrandom 2021-05-18 09:18:24
Published on: 2021-05-18T09:18:24+00:00
When considering a new proof-of-work (PoW), it is important to take into account all the effects until reaching the base physics of the arrow of time, which ultimately makes it another PoW anyway. However, economic considerations such as externalities should not be simplified away when discussing the current PoW's negative externalities related to energy production. Depending on the details of the new PoW, CAPEX may have less externalities than the current PoW. In this case, it would be beneficial to adopt a PoW that is intensive in these types of CAPEX. On the other hand, Keagan McClelland challenges the assertions that the new PoW only pushes energy consumption upstream to chip manufacturing and trades marginal energy consumption for the set of resources it takes to educate and create chip manufacturers. Real-estate and human cognitive work are not energy-intensive and are major factors in the expected costs of some alternative PoWs. The expected mining effort is such that the cost will reach the expected reward, no more, so there is every reason to believe that energy consumption will be small compared to the current PoW. Therefore, the total associated negative externalities for the alternative PoWs may well be much lower than the externalities of energy production. In conclusion, detailed analysis is needed before making a knee-jerk reaction about adopting a new PoW.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T21:59:59.907373+00:00