Ripple’s Camp Attacks Bitcoin Mining With ‘The Stupidest Idea’ Again

Chris Larsen. Source: video screenshot, Youtube / CfC St. Moritz

WaveExecutives continue to criticize Bitcoin (BTC) mining, this time suggesting a new idea that was labeled “the stupidest idea” of 2021 by a mining expert.

Bitcoin should move away from the “climate disaster” that is its proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism and instead adopt a model in which existing miners are rewarded without doing anything, argued the president and co-founder of Ripple, Chris Larsen, in a new proposal.

“The emerging solution among weather experts is that the Bitcoin code should be switched to a low-energy consensus algorithm like those used by almost all other major crypto protocols,” Larsen advocated for a transition to the alternative proof-of-proof algorithm. participation (PoS). .

He added that the main challenge in making such a change would likely be resistance from miners who have invested heavily in equipment, which would become useless should the protocol move to a PoS model.

To solve this problem, Larsen suggested that all existing Bitcoin miners can instead receive a BTC reward based on their share of the current hash rate, without having to mine coins with their electricity-consuming machines.

“Existing miners would simply be entitled to future bitcoin rewards without the need to spend additional energy or make additional investments in mining rigs,” Larsen wrote, adding that this could be subject to participation rules “to further secure the network.” .

Lastly, Ripple’s chairman argued that his proposal could move the Bitcoin network from “its current state of climate disaster to a truly green financial technology of the future.”

The proposal has not been well received by bitcoiners, such as Nic Carter, co-founder of Currency metrics and founding partner of Castle Island Ventures, also known for his analysis of Bitcoin mining, calling it “the stupidest idea I have come across this year.”

“Hey, you know all those nice properties of PoW: unforgettable cost, rotation in the validation set, non-perpetual validation advantage? Let’s remove those, ”Carter added.

The exchange of crypto derivatives BitMEXThe research team itself also didn’t seem to take Chris Larsen’s proposal very seriously:

Others have voiced support for PoW as the best approach to keep the network decentralized.

“Proof of work is the only proven consensus mechanism we have today. Securing billions of dollars in bitcoins”, Alejandro De La Torre de Power test, a Bitcoin mining consultancy, said “If you think you have a better consensus mechanism, build it. Otherwise, shut up.”

Meanwhile, other industry watchers suggested that the problem lies with the way the power is generated.

“Energy consumption is not the problem, it is the means by which it is currently generated. If BTC used all solar energy, this would not be a problem, “said one Twitter user. wrote, adding that the generation of energy in the world must increase independently of bitcoin.

When discussing the proposal on Reddit, several users called it “silly” to grant future rights to receive BTC based on the current hash rate. “[…] Is it some kind of chess move that I’m not seeing? ”Another user asked.

Additionally, concerns regarding PoW’s power use as a consensus mechanism have been repeatedly debunked in the past. According to Lyn Alden, founder of Lyn Alden’s investment strategyMany of the critics who attack Bitcoin’s energy use “start with the assumption that it is useless.”

“A trillion dollars in market capitalization disagrees,” Alden wrote earlier this year, adding: “For example, there is little concern given to the energy use of washing machines around the world, because we understand the value.”

This latest proposal from the president of Ripple is not the first time that representatives of the company, which is associated with the XRP token, have suggested changes to the Bitcoin code.

The same thing also happened in March of this year, when Ripple’s CTO David Schwartz criticized Bitcoin’s PoW consensus mechanism.

The design is “such that true decentralization and disintermediation was never a possibility,” Schwartz said at the time, arguing that the miners are the main stakeholders who are “trying to charge the highest fees they can get away with.”

Back then, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse also offered his take on Bitcoin, saying that it is “not ideal as a payment mechanism” due to energy costs and associated carbon dioxide emissions.


Learn more:
– A closer look at the environmental impact of Bitcoin mining
– ‘Fiat-like’ proof-of-stake chains favor centralization and rich gamers

– See: 6 Crypto CEOs Testify About Threshold Issues, Bitcoin Mining And More
– Major Swedish Power Company Defends Bitcoin Mining As Regulators Propose Ban

– How Bitcoin Mining Could Help Nations With National Energy Production
– Bitcoin miners adapt rapidly as EU deems ‘climate friendly cryptoassets’

– Dominated by institutions, Bitcoin mining is also possible from home
– Top 7 Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Mining Stocks You Could Add to Your Stock Portfolio

– Ethereum’s Buterin Says Tether Is Bitcoin’s ‘Ticking Time Bomb Demon’
– Bitcoiners May Change Their Mind About PoS, ‘Who Knows’, says Buterin
(Updated at 19:26 UTC with a comment from Alejandro De La Torre.)

Leave a Comment