4 ms·
> So why are we still talking about PoW then? Outside of speculation and regulatory evasion, has there been a sufficient use-case for Bitcoin and other proof o
by zhdc1 4y ago
> So why are we still talking about PoW then?
Outside of speculation and regulatory evasion, has there been a sufficient use-case for Bitcoin and other proof of work chains that justify the costs, inconvenience, and disruptive impacts that go along with it?
- koonsolo 4y agoNo, that's why we have PoS and other solutions, no? That was my whole point. Attacking crypto because of PoW is a bit silly when there are other solutions that are way more efficient. That's like attacking electricity because there are coal generators. My initial point.
- zhdc1 4y ago> when there are other solutions that are way more efficient I was explicitly clear that I was commenting on proof of work blockchains. Crypto has a whole host of other issues, but I agree that there are other blockchain/crypto-like solutions that fit - some - of the touted use cases (e.g., GNU Thaler for digital currencies and currency-backed transactions). The issue, however, is that for good or bad, crypto is currently dominated by Bitcoin. The parent comment is relevant and meaningful in this context, and should not have been flagged.