On: Proof-of-work should be banned

[fastball]

> invariably brought to you by someone holding a proof-of-stake bag.

[egypturnash → fastball]

Heavens forbid that anyone who doesn't own cryptocurrency should have a studied opinion about it and its massive reliance on Proof-Of-Converting-Absurd-Amounts-Of-Power-Into-Waste-Heat.

Heavens forbid that anyone who does own cryptocurrency and have concerns about said massive reliance on PoCAAoPIWH should put their money where their mouth is regarding those concerns. An absolute scandal.

[fastball → egypturnash]

Then put your name where your mouth is instead of hiding behind anonymity. Hardly a necessity in this case.

[majewsky → fastball]

Just because I don't want to participate in your Ponzi scheme doesn't mean I cannot point out how idiotic it is.

[fastball → majewsky]

My ponzi scheme?

Clearly this person does want to participate in the "ponzi scheme", they just want people to ignore the PoW schemes they're not holding a bag for and instead participate in the PoS schemes which they are.

[mjlawson → fastball]

That's my take here as well. It's hard to take this seriously and I refuse to back this when it's posted anonymously, although I agree with the sentiment behind it.

[raclage → mjlawson]

Is this really the type of thing where an anonymous author can't have any credibility? It's an analysis of bitcoin and its energy use not a claim about personal experience.

[Deukhoofd → fastball]

Weak ad hominem. Attack the argument, not imaginary attributes of the author.

[stopBurncoins → fastball]

That'd be me.

Yep, a total of < 1$, on an single, unknown and not even traded, but old coin (which I won't even mention) that is not going anywhere. Basically for fun.

[asplake → fastball]

Who are you quoting? Not the article as far as I can tell

[JeremyBanks → fastball]

"How dare they put their money where their mouth is?!"

"How dare they invest in what they think is a less harmful alternative?!"

"How dare they question our ponzi scheme!?"