Even so, decentralization is a means to an end - not an end-goal. It is essential for Bitcoin to be a useful alternative, of course.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Monarch via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On 2015-08-31 20:27, Justus Ranvier wrote: > >> You don't understand what value proof of work provides, or what features >> differentiate good money from poor money, and you can't make a >> defensible statement of Bitcoin's value proposition. >> >> Because you can't do these things, you assume nobody else can do them >> either and therefore the only way for Bitcoin to survive is to sweep the >> problem under the rug and distract users with a word that means nothing >> (and therefore means whatever the observer wants it to mean). >> >> This is not a strategy that can be successful in the long term. >> > > > Proof of work is probabilistic transaction ordering (and timestamping > by extension), the only perceivable value in it is that it is > decentralized. If you don't have that set as a requirement there are > plenty of companies around who will act as a time stamping notary for > you, just as there are many cloud services around to host the SQL- > based Bitcoin replacement. > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
