The problem is that, as a technology, blockchain does almost nothing new. It's a much slower and less-efficient version of technology that already works correc

The problem is that, as a technology, blockchain does almost nothing new. It's a much slower and less-efficient version of technology that already works correctly (i.e. the distributed database). The only thing that proof-of-work (or proof-of-whatever) accomplishes is that it addresses the "double-spend" problem whereby the same person signs two mutually incompatible transactions and tries to get different nodes to respond to both of those transactions as if they were valid. Proof-of-work addresses this issue by using a voting system whereby everybody gets votes based on how much electricity they waste. There are other, better, ways to address this issue. Anyway, I could talk about blockchain and what's wrong with it all day, but I don't want to bore you. I could also talk about specifically what's wrong with Bitcoin and what would still be wrong with Bitcoin even if it were implemented using a sane distributed database, but again, I don't want to bore you. The important thing to remember out of all of this is that you have a fundamentally silly technology. So it's only ever going to be used by people who don't understand it, or people who are trying to trick other people. It is therefore not an coincidence that there are so many blockchain-based scams. And it's also not a coincidence that it's so hard to tell the difference between what's a scam and what's not. These are fundamental consequences to the nature of blockchain as a technology. And if you think I don't know what I'm talking about, you should probably know that, for a time I was considering using blockchain as the underlying technology for my digital currency project. But the more I learned about blockchain, the more I came to realize that there's essentially nothing there. If you think I'm wrong, prove me wrong.