The projects mentioned in the article we are commenting on (or more accurately the chain they run on - Luna) are Proof of Stake. PoW is completely irrelevant here.
Yes, and it can't hold it's peg, that's why we are here. So apparently this is not a functioning project that is working (as in "can solve its proposed use-case")
You may be disinterested, but you're not informed. The people above you are not arguing about whether LUNA is a successful coin in general, but over how it reflects on "proof of stake" vs. "proof of work" protocols. If you think LUNA losing their peg is a good argument against PoS, you don't know enough about cryptocurrency to judge these arguments. LUNA's peg to the dollar is ensured with a scheme that has zero to do with either proof of stake or proof of work. Saying Luna's failure redounds on proof of stake protocols is like saying that AOL's failure redounds on the HTTP protocol.
ethereum is changing its consensus mechanism to PoS later this year. when it does that, the only major PoW chain left will be bitcoin. all other smart contract chains with large userbases are PoS already.
There are plenty, but none that are decentralized. They all use checkpoints or a trusted signer. Proof of work is a way to bootstrap consensus without a trusted party.
