This is the "not too inclusive" attitude that I referenced. It is not only rude to provide your opinion about a subject with this voice of tone. It is also prob

This is the "not too inclusive" attitude that I referenced. It is not only rude to provide your opinion about a subject with this voice of tone. It is also problematic because it doesn't make it possible to have a positive discussion and learn from each other. A lot of people on HN do exactly understand the nuanced differences between open source projects and communities. It is I guess enough to mention that Hyperledger is a IBM kind of enterprisey setting. I will not try to explain in depth why proof of work is really difficult to substitute. But in summary: you will need to create an algorithm that prevents sybil attacks + creates incentives for participants to keep the network up + mechanism for byzatine consensus. Anonymous participation goal is not a goal on itself but a prerequisite for decentralization. Otherwise someone needs to manage and control who is eligible to access the network... You are really wrong about incentive motives too. The example involving wire transfers is exactly the point. Blockchain is not about a record in a database of a money amount, it is directly the value representation. This creates a big difference. I'm sure you will understand this if you give it a more open minded thought. I did a lot of research and talked to enough people. I will not respond to more ad hominem reactions.