| > Some of those do calculation that are actually useful on their own. That means that there are coins with better, as you say, fundamentals. no, getting anything valuable out of PoW function besides security of the chain is a subsidy to the attacker and lowers the security of the chain by that same amount. it also introduces unnecessary complexity, potential of bugs, point of contention over consensus rules, etc. objectively worse. > Yes. trade decentralization and independence for performance - bitcoin doesn't, it's the most performant and decentralized financial network in the world lots of hype and marketing - there's barely any compared to shitcoins lots of bells and whistles of questionable value - barely any compared to shitcoins lots of money being made in scams and rug-pulls - zero scams perpetrated by bitcoin developers, shitcoin world is built on scams so no, none of it aplies to bitcoin, all of it applies to shitcoins. > Only if performance and decentralization mean something completely different in cryptocurrency than anywhere else i don't care enough to argue with you about definitions of performance and decentralization, ultimately you decide what matters to you. what matters to me at the moment is best represented by bitcoin - security per joule, cost of attack and cost to participate. every other shitcoin is far behind. > BTC is full of marketing campaigns, politics and other shenanigans. To claim otherwise is to ignore, or be completely oblivious, to bitcoin history and present false. bitcoin ecosystem is full of people that will market things to you, some honest, some not very much. shitcoins on the other hand are built on and of marketing and scams. if you don't understand the difference, we can just stop here, no point to continue. |