> so not Bitcoin. Thats the authors point. So not necessarily Bitcoin, is my point. If PoS works out at scale then PoW chains are probably toast. I don't know

> so not Bitcoin. Thats the authors point. So not necessarily Bitcoin, is my point. If PoS works out at scale then PoW chains are probably toast. I don't know if that will happen, though, there's a self-licking lollipop aspect to the whole concept which has never set right with me. I'm glad we're going to get to find out though. I think the entire discourse around energy use is misguided, but there's no question that using 2000 times less energy and equipment is both better for the environment and economically superior ceteris paribus. The complete auditability of BTC is not to its credit, but Bitcoin is conservative, not completely static. Big blocks didn't get implemented (I agree with this decision) but Segwit 2x did. If BTC added ZK-SNARK shielded transactions, that would be a big win for privacy and anonymity. That could easily happen in the next ten years. The winning network is more of a game theory problem than a technological one; we'll just have to wait, take such bets as we're comfortable taking, and see what happens.