MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
1–10 of 77 posts
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#2Compact fusion reactors exist and are functional… and they chose griftcoin junk tech.
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#3Compact fusion reactors exist and are functional… and they chose griftcoin junk tech.
Don't get me wrong, plenty of griftcoin junk tech exists, but Ethereum is the most capable platform and moving away from Proof Of Work is a significant step.
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#4Compact fusion reactors exist and are functional… and they chose griftcoin junk tech.
People who write articles, submit articles, admin articles and comment on articles can't buy fusion reactors and profit from them. So, we have biases with cryptocurrency.
Opinions about unknowable consensus mechanisms aside, I have serious doubts about PoS given there's no clear associated PoW presented alongside the staking. But what do I know? I have grey hairs.
I still like Bitcoin and Lightning because the PoW and PoS work with each other to deliver similar functional properties. This is a personal opinion based on reading and trying to imagine how the Yapese managed their stashes of huge coins.
Fun fact: One particularly large coin dropped off an outrigger on the way back from being mined and instead of taking it out of circulation, a few of the consensus makers went out and dove on it to confirm it was indeed sitting on the bottom of the ocean floor.
I've set intent to go dive it and see it for myself.
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#5Technology Review is not "MIT", it's an attempt at competing with Wired and Popular Science.
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#6Compact fusion reactors exist and are functional… and they chose griftcoin junk tech.
People who write articles, submit articles, admin articles and comment on articles can't buy fusion reactors and profit from them. So, we have biases with cryptocurrency. Opinions about unknowable consensus mechanisms aside, I have serious doubts about PoS given there's no clear associated PoW presented alongside the staking. But what do I know? I have grey hairs. I still like Bitcoin and Lightning because the PoW an…
>One particularly large coin dropped off an outrigger on the way back from being mined and instead of taking it out of circulation, a few of the consensus makers went out and dove on it to confirm it was indeed sitting on the bottom of the ocean floor.
What does this mean? A cursory Googling isn't shedding light on this metaphor for me.
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#7[deleted]
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#8Compact fusion reactors exist and are functional… and they chose griftcoin junk tech.
Don't get me wrong, plenty of griftcoin junk tech exists, but Ethereum is the most capable platform and moving away from Proof Of Work is a significant step.
They may be grifters and scammers but at least they are not burning down the planet. But I am curious about this: Etherium is not the first crypto to go PoS. Are there any significant technical advantages compared to other PoS implementations?
Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#9Re: MIT Chose Ethereum’s PoS as Top Technological Breakthrough
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who write articles, submit articles, admin articles and comment on articles can't buy fusion reactors and profit from them. So, we have biases with cryptocurrency. Opinions about unknowable consensus mechanisms aside, I have serious doubts about PoS given there's no clear associated PoW presented alongside the staking. But what do I know? I have grey hairs. I still like Bitcoin and Lightning because the PoW an…
>One particularly large coin dropped off an outrigger on the way back from being mined and instead of taking it out of circulation, a few of the consensus makers went out and dove on it to confirm it was indeed sitting on the bottom of the ocean floor. What does this mean? A cursory Googling isn't shedding light on this metaphor for me.
It almost reads like a GPT-3 bot wrote it, I thought I was having a stroke trying to understand it.