From my perspective, the main objection you have toward this is that you do not find value in what this is. I assure you that I, and many others do. Are we all

From my perspective, the main objection you have toward this is that you do not find value in what this is. I assure you that I, and many others do. Are we all wrong? Are practical (in that they exist and work, today) solutions that solve others peoples problems wrong because you do not understand them? I encourage you to let go of your preconceived notions and spend a few hours, days, months or years reading and experiencing it. Contribute code. Build something with it. Earn it. Spend it. "My argument" Try this new novel technology, it solves problems for me, and many others. Its unlike anything we have seen before. Its a whole new field that is complex and touches on elements of game theory, economics, computer science and sociology. It's been working without fail for 12 years, with many years of innovation ahead. No signs of stopping, and captivating some of the best minds of our time. As it evolves, we learn more about ourselves and the nature of the things we build. "Counter Argument": Nobody needs it. It doesn't work. It uses too much energy. You are wrong about all the things you have experience with. I do not have the imagination to see how this is useful to anyone. Existing things are better. Cool dude. re: calibrate. Check the certificate or the TLS connection to this website -- you may notice that SHA256 is used for certificate public key hashing/message authentication as a cryptoprimitive in the x509 encoding and ciphersuites. I encourage you to think of a thought exercise where a practical security metric of this cryptoprimitive might be useful and to whom. I don't think we can convince each other of our positions.