Yeah, at this point I'm done here. One more on the ignore list.Most critics of cryptocurrencies and general blockchain applications tend to "understand" them both way better than "cryptobros" who say that people just don't understand.
Proof of Work [...] from the idiots at stanford. [...]
To me it looks like both sides are being petty about this discussion and are taking cheap shots at each other. I'm not sure this will advance anything, except time
Specifically for you @dskneo what you are doing wrong with posts like the above IMO (besides the tone) is that you are not explicitly saying the precise detail you think somebody else doesn't have a full grasp of, and then you are not offering the explanation based on what you've learned.
Sending people off to read generic stuff about crypto is low effort, and yeah can feel insulting as they might indeed be familiar to say 90% of the contents.
Oh man, this thread is suddely quite different. LOL
Proof of Work, Economy of cryptocurrencies under Proof of work, Smart Contracts and more, from the idiots at stanford.
https://www.scs.stanford.edu/17au-cs244b/labs/projects/porat_pratap_shah_adkar.pdf
Is it really a six page student lab paper?
"Digitally mined" currency is an investment product of the greater-fool-theory variety. It has zero intrinsic value and therefore can't be categorized as an asset. The so-called "value" is purely speculative on price and movement. There is no cashflow or economic activity, rather it's a medium of exchange / bartering tool that various people have assigned value to, as part of a larger zero-sum game.
The underlying technologies of blockchain and proof of work/proof of stake, and various metaimprovements with encryption are all useful technologies, none of which have any bearing on establishing crypto value.
Crypto is only so much the future as any other pointless bubble. See also: NFTs
I see an itch to throw shade at an individual for bringing proper information to a debate. Assuming I fall for the bait of such a petty comment, from whom does the information have to come from to suit your standards? and why would you pick the academic paper out of all the links I posted, whose authors we know even less of.
POW economics.
https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/2976749.2978341
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9388487
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8864381
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9020129
http://www.joca.cn/EN/abstract/abstract23167.shtml
https://studreadywork.ru/wp-content...sis-of-Two-Phase-Proof-of-Work-in-Bitcoin.pdf
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8674185
https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3173574.3174179
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202202
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0736585315301118
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1544612320300374
https://web.s.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=1931907X&AN=133549558&h=1L6DkDxUFgi/ZhRO/6rbEZZ0sTT1wzH27hIyroLT+fS1eLYpyh2kQJSkq1C2ZczbF5EaLI5VeWupx4cGM6Sf3g==&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=1931907X&AN=133549558
Smart-Contracts
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8257877
https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.06372
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8756390
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10664-019-09796-5
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-15032-7_46
https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.00286
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4842-3444-0_4
NFT
https://www.researchgate.net/profil...gible-tokens-to-aid-wildlife-conservation.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.07447
https://www.mdpi.com/2674-1032/1/1/3/htm
https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/21/11/3822
https://theblockchaintest.com/uploads/resources/Ferdinand Regnar-Andre Schweizer-Nils Urbach - NFTs in Practice non-Fungible Tokens as Core Component of a Blockchain Based Event Ticketing Application - 2019.pdf
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0007681321002019
Intrinsic Value definition debate.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12525-021-00491-2
Perhaps the post from your friend actually deserved my response, no? lets read it again, and then pick any of the links above.
Dskneo, you already know what you know. Don't get drawn into this "debate" here imo. It's a trap
However, just coming across as saying it's great because I think so and then throwing a bunch of links up does nothing to bolster any point you feel you might be making.
Note how multitude of us do not think you are making arguments.
The way you drop those links make me believe you have no idea what scientific is or how universities work.
Could you please do a brief summary, just so we're all on the same page? No links required, just your thoughts.I did.