4 ms·
You would think they are but no, people actually believe in the nonsense that these token somehow store something of real value. You may have seen the BTC is a
by noxer 6y ago
You would think they are but no, people actually believe in the nonsense that these token somehow store something of real value. You may have seen the BTC is a battery nonsense article. Same with this, some people think the token is somehow valuable because someone had to donate research to "generate it".
>So your main problem is with devs, the only ones who are actually doing work not just contributing machine work?
Its actual programming sure, but it has no real use therefore no real market value. The whole system exists because it pays for itself. Its kinda like a fake financial perpetuum mobile that was started with a money printer, attracted a lot people and convinced them to gable. It now keeps going but it actually sucks money from outside in people just dont see it.
>All these 'concerns' are true to a much greater degree for all other economy, yet when it comes to crypto people are so giddy to pile on with their moral outrage based on their superstitions, I find it morally outrageous.
Well I hold crypto since 2013. I'm not against it at all. I also have no moral problem with people gambling.
This is just a useless project. There are plenty more, in fact almost all of them are but the post is about this one coin so I gotta point out the nonsense of this one. And this one is hefty one because it doesn't even try to have a use-case.
- nathias 6y agoI don't get it then, of course it has market value that is the 'issue'? Devs usually sell their work as premine, if they can that's the market value of their work thus far, right? I don't get what this project is doing wrong that wouldn't apply to all crypto, I think what it is doing right is making PoW into actually useful computation, which is great I hope we see much more of this, but not perhaps just for reasearch BOINC projects but also for cloud computing etc. thats where the real value of PoW imo is ...
- noxer 6y agoOkay lets go with the premise that it does it wrong like all other crypto. Now what? Its still wrong? How is this even an argument? And more so how is it an pro argument? Its not less wrong or something its exactly the same wrong. >I think what it is doing right is making PoW into actually useful computation... PoW is used for decentral consensus. Its super bad at this but somewhat works anyway. FBA consensus does not need PoW so in general we dont need PoW for a bitcoin like system. FBA system exist since like 2013 or so. Using PoW for something good is still objective worse than not using PoW for the system at all. Else we could add some PoW to literally everything. Now even worse than that is using PoS (objectively worse than FBA) and then add PoW/PoR for no reason at all (now you have gridcoin). It doesn't try to be a better bitcoin because if it would there would be no reason to add any kind of PoW since its not needed. The work/research is not used in the consensus mechanism at all. Its a PoS system with a PoW/R money printer attached. The whole thing obviously doesn't come from bitcoin evolving somehow into something better. It comes form BOINIC devs jumping on the blockchain train because why not. It allowed them to print incentives at no cost to attach people to donate they CPU power. Its literally a money printer to attract donations its ridiculous. If you would say someone that they get a printed griddollar bill for every dollar donation people would laugh. But somehow if you add a bit blockchain flavor it fools people to do exactly that and worse people are even willing to buy the griddollar bill.
- nathias 6y agomost of PoW is not used for consensus, but for distribution, to use PoS for consensus with PoW for distribution is exactly as ridiculus as PoW