this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2025
76 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
1818 readers
65 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It could at least solve the Nicole problem. Proof-of-work was invented for exactly this : reducing spam in inboxes
Question is of spam or proof of work burns the planet faster and I feel like it would be the latter.
It does not work like that. The principle is that legitimate users all pay negligible cost, but a spammy user would have to pay so much it is just not possible. The spammy user would not even try, it discourages them
What kind of a cost is low enough that eight billion people can pay it for their legitimate communications without burning the planet too much, but also high enough that a spammer with a botnet won't bother to let other people's machines pay the cost?
I am so fucking tired of "just tie the PoW into every protocol interaction and every device! what do you mean old devices can't be updated? you're just afraid of the future!" fucking fans
chucklefucks coming along shouting "you don't know what you're talking about!" while having little fucking idea what the person they're engaging with actually does