Thanks bud. Good talk

Thanks. That's interesting. How many nodes would be required to gain control? How much would that cost? And why would anyone want to do that?

I imagine once someone managed to secure control it wouldn't go unnoticed by the users. It would probably trigger a mass exodus from whatever chain it happened to occur on, effectively tanking the token price. The controller would have spent a considerable amount of funds only to be left with a dead chain and worthless tokens.

Doesn't really seem worth it unless I'm missing something.

I see. Could you elaborate on that at all? What are the claims vs. the reality? How is power concentrated to those with more money? Genuinely interested.

Crypto is vast my friend. It is not a financial system per se. At its core it is tools for human coordination which, by necessity contains a financial system.

It is indeed an experiment but it's a little premature to say that it has failed. The cake is still in the oven.

It's true that plenty of crypto projects have failed. That's to be expected in a bleeding edge experimental space. People try things out and sometimes they fail. That's how it works. There are however, plenty of projects that are still going strong fueled by very talented developers working tirelessly to address all of your criticisms. It just takes time. This is complex stuff. It's the merging of cryptography, economics and computer science among other things. It's going to take a little while.

Excuse me friend but why not say proof of stake? It seems to me as if that IS a great solution. I've never mined any type of crypto currency but I do run Ethereum validators. I run them on an Intel NUC mini PC. When I first switched them on I started with 6 validators all running on the same machine. I noticed no discernable difference in my household power consumption. Then I increased to 12 and then later 27 validators, again all on the same machine and again no discernible difference on my power bill. I can repeat this for hundreds of validators all on this one mini PC and not use any more power than I'm currently using. To do the same on a proof of work chain I'd need one specialized, dedicated machine that would use orders of magnitude more power for each miner.

The ease of piracy. Literally type whatever you want into any search engine.

Sure. Why the hell not?

I like golf.

It's super challenging, which I find fun. I like that I can slowly get better at it and watch myself progress but probably never really master it. Plus, it's a really great way to get outside and do something with some friends or even some strangers.

I hate the elitist, racist, and sexist origins of the game but, like all bad ideas they're becoming extinct. Sexism and racism have been pretty much eradicated from the sport compared to the time of it's inception.

I play on courses that are reasonably priced and open to anyone and I have plenty of options. I'm not even remotely wealthy and neither are any of the people I play with. Equipment can be expensive but it doesn't have to be.

Almost every passtime requires some space and often some level of infrastructure needs to be built and maintained. Think about swimming pools and hockey rinks, not to mention giant stadiums built for only a few professional teams to play in. Hardly anyone is mad about those things, and the list goes on.

I get hating the rich. I get hating something because it's perceived as something that only rich people do but that's not really the reality here. Sure, rich people play golf but only about a quarter of courses are private so maybe there are actually way more poors like me playing. What do you think?

It could be both.

The hottest 12 months in the past 125,000 years...so far.

Yep, experimentation is the essence of fucking around. But also finding out. Maybe I'm wrong here. Maybe it's somewhere in the middle.

I know it's not symmetrical, but personally, I would consider "test with experiment" part of the fuck around phase.