Quote from: funkenstein on June 09, 2015, 05:21:44 AM

Quote from: Geremia on June 09, 2015, 04:58:13 AM

Quote from: funkenstein on June 09, 2015, 04:31:23 AM

Well this is hardly a criticism of blockchain tech, wouldn't you agree? Consider this criticism of headwear tech:

A helmet is only useful for protecting the head. It is un-useful for things besides head protection.

The criticism is a species of the "Bitcoin-wastes-electricity" criticism.

Good point. I would say that particular argument is indeed just as much complete and total nonsense as the earlier one.

Streetlights waste electricity. Chargers plugged in when not in use waste electricity. Air conditioned casinos with doors and windows wide open waste electricity.
Bitcoin in no way whatsoever wastes electricity.

Sure, wannabe miners using CPUs to mine BTC waste electricity. So do wannabe miners overdoing their fan use, or using hairdryers to make tea.
Bitcoin however rewards efficient miners only.

It's too bad there is not such a mechanism to also make streetlights, chargers, and air conditioning so damn efficient.

Agreed, electricity is neccesary for any digital system and it is a non-argument. The same argument could be used for the hundreds of terabytes to store dog pictures on the internet.

Quote from: dogie on June 09, 2015, 12:53:22 AM

1) Irreversibility, ie if someone sends to an incorrect / dead address / loses keys then its gone. Or people injection malicious stuff into the blockchain leaving it there forever

Is irreversibility not a feature of the blockchain? I think irreversibility has always been by design.