Cryptocurrency Is an Abject Disaster

If we, for example, had a team of 20 working on our CI offering, we would have re-allocated at least 50% of them to work full-time on combating the miners. And this trend is not slowing, it is only accelerating.

One week, we may have a breakthrough and find some common heuristic in running binaries that identify _this weeks_ miners, but next week they will have figured out that we have figured it out and make the requisite changes. It's something akin to the early days of anti-virus software, but given the 2021 scale of the internet, the iterations are moving at warp speed in comparison.

If you care nothing of the environmental impact (IMO you should), then take a second and ask yourself what your life as a creator of _things_ be like with no free access to CI tooling? I guaranty you that changes to the free tier of ALL CI services are on the way, and I heavily suspect that when that happens, the miners will take over any service offering paid CI where the return outweighs the price. This will lead to an escalation of pricing such that side-project, FOSS, and anything less than large profitable software will be priced out of hosted CI and be forced into a different model.

Stake: No crypto stake of any kind

My tainted opinion: I think the criticisms of Proof-of-Work are totally justified here. There are perverse incentives for "miners" to execute work in the cheapest way they can, whether that is JS miners, bot farms, abuse of free services, hacked AWS accounts, abusing favorable tenancy conditions etc. and even if the miner isn't downright stealing, there's a good chance they are operating in an environment where the cheapest electricity isn't going to be exactly "green" either.

Practically all of these mining efforts are not done out of some kind of altruistic, utopian goal of shutting down central bankers, but are simply done to make money.

What I think is unfair of Drew is to categorize cryptocurrency as a whole as an abject disaster, when in his own article he writes "attempts at reform, like proof-of-stake, are viciously blocked". Well proof-of-stake still falls under the cryptocurrency banner, doesn't it? Perhaps it's better to say that cryptocurrency is facing an identity crisis.

My opinions on proof-of-storage: I always expected that the price of these coins would naturally level out because you'd have to remain competitive with the likes of Backblaze or S3. I don't know enough about the incentive structures of Proof-of-Storage coins, but if there are incentives to have empty spinning rust then these are the wrong incentives and I'd say those protocols are likely broken. Rewards should be heavily slashed if there's wasted storage (ie. empty storage), so as to disincentivize miners from over-provisioning hardware (hoarding disks).

Disclosure:

I'm currently holding roughly a pay check each of Harmony ONE and Polkadot and have a small, locked stake in ETH2. All of these projects are Proof-of-Stake.

I also own pocket change amounts of Stellar Lumens which are used between myself and a friend to keep track of who's paid for lunch. As I understand it, the Stellar consensus protocol is not computationally intensive when compared to Proof-of-Work.

(obviously ignoring fees and such but they also dont go into anything its just paying someone for providing a service)

If you look at crypto as the huge trading space and you dont see it produce anything is simply because its not supposed to. You look at the space that just exchanges stuff. If you look at a grocery store and you dont see anything produced you are right. The store is just where people exchange stuff. Its not where value is created or where you would find innovation in producing something.