Chia (not) falling down (anymore)

General Chia Discussion
43

LOL that’s because you only have a few hard drives. By the way, comparing your 10 hard drives to 10 graphic cards is wrong on so many levels, it doesn’t work like that. I told you, profit wise, right now 36 x 10TB hard drives = 1 RTX3090 that’s $8/day. Your psu might be able to handle 20-22 hard drives, and believe me you need that many if you want to make a profit but guess what, if the netspace explodes again, those drives you have will earn a lot less so you will need to add more drives if you want to earn as much as a 3090. You need to buy another psu, more hard drives, cooling, cables, sata cards, etc. These drives take out a lot more space than a gpu, generate more heat! (because of plotting) and take a LOT more time to setup(plotting!) Chia is not green, you can believe whatever you want but if you think Chia is green, well… you’re simply wrong.

Right now, a 3090 is actually greener than my entire Chia farm. That’s a fact

But that’s why I should use 18TB hard drives, right? That would make my ROI go up to 2.5-3 years… a joke if you ask me. Even so, the electricity used to have the same profit ($8/day) is only 40-45% lower than gpu mining! That’s the best Chia can offer right now. With 4TB hard drives you’re looking at a 200%+ increase in electricity use to earn the same $8/day. How crazy is that?? There’s nothing green about Chia, only their logo.

PS: I have an Atmotube Pro mining Planets. It generates 23 planets/day = $8/day! A very small $200 device I carry around with me to measure the air quality everywhere I go which offers a lot more to the future of our planet every single day than my “green” Chia farm ever will probably in its entire life. Chia has NOTHING to do with it being green or environmentally friendly.

44

You don’t know how to farm Chia efficiently but that’s you. Your choices. I don’t think you’ve spend much time researching Chia or watching interviews. Your inept approach doesn’t mean you can generalize about whether Chia is environmentally friendly. Bram’s main point is as a comparison it’s a far greener and less power hungry crypto. You talk like you expect to fly to Mars without fuel. Bit far fetched don’t you think? To call something “green” is relative. It’s subjective. Again, your inept approach is yours. Not everyone’s. Your 3090 for mining means another GPU required for the next guy who needs it for gaming.That takes… Wait for it… Production. ie. Waste, power and resource usage.

45

And your hard drives are not producing the same waste? Energy? Resource usage?? You can believe whatever you want, you can believe in Bram if you wish. Personally I look at facts, numbers, as a business would. This Network is supposed to be mainly supported by data centers, right? To support the network they would look at what I’m looking not at Bram’s opinion.

Green is not relative. Green means it comes from sources which are constantly and naturally renewed. How is Chia green in this context if you need 15+ hard drives to compete with one graphics card??

It doesn’t matter, you are obviously not listening to reason so feel free to ignore my comments and views. We can agree to disagree :slight_smile:

You’d be surprised by how much time I’ve invested into researching what Chia’s all about. But I don’t believe everything I hear from Bram or any other developer until I have proof. Some things said about Chia were true, some were not (like this thing with Chia being green) and some we’ll have to wait and see. See you around

1 Like
46

May i add 2 cents in your debate.

It is not about “profitability” versus cost. Any crypto tokens have no intrinsic value. That’s not the point! It is all about efficiency of validating transactions. If a technology is able to validate more transactions per energy spent, then it is better in the long run. The time horizon for blockchain technology is decades from now, until it becomes a mainstream utility.

Here is an example of a low tech blockchain for you: a ledger book that one fills using pencil. It was invented some time along when writing was invented. Nowadays, PoW or PoS, or PoST - are just protocols to achieve the goal of transaction settlement, distributed.

Those who “farm” in certain blockchain are just apes. Myself included. We, apes, or early adopters of the technology, have incentive to make a profit. We expend our resources in hope that the hype curve can yield us more value than we put in. But this is just a cost to develop an efficient protocol. That’s how free market works.

But the bright minds who can put this to real work, who can provide utility today - the programmers who use blockchain - they will provide the real value.

For example, let’s consider a real estate property on a beach. Can you buy one? Maybe not. But what if I told you that 10 people can “chip in” as a pool and buy this property for collective ownership. The pool can be governed by a “smart contract” - a program. Each member is entitled to use that property up to their “fair share”. But what if you want to go to the beach during summer time? Well, other members want that, too! So they will compete. The smart contract may stipulate that those who want to compete among other owners at that time, may pay extra of their share to ensure that they will get to use that beach property when they desire.

What about the other owners? Maybe they don’t want to compete, yet they are still entitled to 1/10th of the value. Or what if ALL of the pool members just want to get income of that property? No problem! The smart contract can settle this in such a way that those who “abstain” can get their bank account credited for amount proportionate to their share.

If the property ends up being rented out to a 3rd party (tenant), all the proceeds will go to the owners proportionately.

Nowadays, there are blockchain technologies that can implement smart contracts. For example: ravencoin, etherium “Solidity”, chialisp. Those developers who can make use of those technologies are going to provide real value for their clients.

4 Likes
47

“The stock market is a device for transferring money from the impatient to the patient” - Warren Buffet

3 Likes
48

An opinion does not necessarily = fact https://chiapower.org/

3 Likes
49

So you are comparing the power consumption of a matured Network with a startup? It doesn’t work like that.

Still, let’s presume they are correct with their estimate and let’s compare Chia now with Ethereum in August 2016, 1 year after launch. The hashrate was ~ 6TH from what I could find. This is roughly 100 times less than it is right now for argument sakes. So power consumption is safe to presume it was 100 times less than it is right now.

So, looking back at those energy consumption numbers, Eth was using 76MW and Chia is using 30MW but honestly, I think Chia is using closer to 50MW right now. Yes, there is a decrease in energy consumption BUT nowhere near what they want you to believe.

Don’t compare current Eth Network with current Chia… that’s like comparing Amazon’s energy consumption with that of a supermarket. Feel free to add your input.

Regards

50

Maybe you should read the article before you continue your incorrect line of thought. The facts and equations are clearly laid out in the article Monty linked and show that you are completely missing the point.

The question of long term power consumption is not about the profitability of your farm. It is about transaction cost. Keeping a POS blockchain running and doing transactions consumes far less power than a POW equivalent.

2 Likes
51

So you think comparing Eth in 2016 with Chia right now in power consumption is wrong?

52

You still have not read the article.

I’m bailing on this argument quickly.

Thread muted.

53

You are avoiding my question and now you are running away… Can we just talk about power consumption?

54

I needed extra popcorn for this one. An epic, yet futile discussion. I feel more at peace knowing my instincts were right on this. Pink Floyd - Comfortably Obtuse

1 Like
55

Srsly, you comparing Chia to Eth is what got us here. :roll_eyes:

I’m not interested in your opinions. Show me the math that proves your claim, otherwise you’re just talking shit and wasting electricity.

56

From a Mining/Farming point of view, yes Chia is not much more efficiënt than ETH.
This is just looking at $ per W value.
I calculated this for my own farm and GPU. The Farm (a month ago) was about 18% more productive per Watt than my 6600 XT.

I doubt that figure will change very significantly. When price goes up, so will the Netspace (most likely). So this would lead to there only being a certain bandwidth for $/W value to change.

However, as others have pointed out, this is a very limited point of view.

  • Chia already has a more decentralized blockchain than ETH
  • Chia can already process more transactions than ETH
    And it does this at a fraction of the energy cost. The transaction/Watt is much better

Then the next question is, will Chia grow to the same energy consumption level as ETH over time? I do think this is a fair question as Chia is still young and neither BTC or ETH used much power in their early days. This is a general issue with blockchains that adding more power does not increase the functionality directly. The number of blocks per day is fixed no matter how many Asics or TiB you throw at it.

To reach the same power consumption as current ETH, Chia would have to grow to about 20.000 EiB while the total produced HDD capacity was around 1000 EiB for 2020.
So using the complete worldwide HDD production capacity for the Next 20 years is needed to reach that level.
This pretty much answers the question…

Then there are other benefits as well. Chia farming can only be made more efficiënt by making larger and/or more energy efficiënt storage devices. This will also be useful to the rest of the market. Asics on the other hand are just pure e-waste and not particularly useful for industry development.
(just for fun)

3 Likes
57

Really good arguments and yeah I agree with those statements entirely.

This is the only point I was trying to make. Thanks for clarifying

2 Likes
58

Hit the nail on the head.

If there’s money in it, ppl will invest.
That’s not a crypto problem though, but a human problem.

59

572×631 35.1 KB

1 Like
60

Chia is supposed to be about using what already exists out there. Just because some inept farmers decided to go to Best Buy, and I’m not faulting you for the excitement, doesn’t mean that your case applies to what Chia is supposed to be. Their case about “green” is about using what’s already out there. This was based on fact, not fiction. Sure, the path may deviate from that, but their claims are not fake or wrong. If people are going to be dumb about their choices, that should be held against Chia’s mission statement?

Proof of work does this. It takes useful hardware, GPUs in this case, it takes those out of circulation. In essence it causes a MASSIVE over production of units. That sucks resources, energy, etc out of the planet. IN OTHER WORDS IT’S NOT ONE TO ONE. You can’t just say Chia and ETH use the same energy. You could say it, but it sure it dumb to say it without any context. If you want to say that Chia does the same thing and requires over production of drives? Then circle back to my point number one. You are inept when it comes to Chia. Leave the farming to those with unused disk space and stop contributing to the global problem of e-waste.

61

mWh / transaction <<<< THIS!

MWh / lambo <<<< NOT THIS!

62

I think the biggest concern would be that Chia has typically risen and fallen with BTC and ETH. With both BTC and ETH surging right now, Chia is as flat as a pancake. I do not interpret that as meaningless. It has essentially flat lined when in reality, coins like Chia should be receiving some of the love going around. Note I haven’t checked other “S” coins the past day or two. Would be nice if Chia wasn’t the only one flat lining during a surge.