Cheers, read the paper 10+ years ago. Nothing new or interesting in that time. Very impressive restatements of old ideas introduced by other people in typical p

Cheers, read the paper 10+ years ago. Nothing new or interesting in that time. Very impressive restatements of old ideas introduced by other people in typical pseudo-academic Protocol Labs style. Protocol Labs is famous for reinventing wheels poorly. It's like they look at dated papers and say: 'what can we do to sell this basic shit as our own.' Then they end up with horrible versions of STUN, TURN, hole-punching, DHTs, torrenting, commit-reveal schemes, hash-locks, and other technologies (((that are already well-known and ah... exist?))) You might be thinking that I'm making this up to troll. But the funny thing is so few people have any idea about this area of technology a company like Protocol Labs can get away with being completely insular, mediocre, unimaginative, impractical, and actually full of shit, and no one will notice. In fact, I'm routinely reminded what a 'visionary' the founder is. Despite nothing of value ever coming out of the company. But what I've learned is if enough people believe the lie it might as well be true. Now give me money! Space, space, blockchain, space!