For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work. Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.
Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this? From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.
Thanks for the information , it is a cool unique way of looking at transactions on a blockchain , instead of paying a fee for the sending of a transaction you are using a small amount of CPU usage for what amounts to less than a few seconds.
Since this method having each transaction confirm itself by sender and receiver and their resources being used , does this mean scale-ability is greater than that of other conventional cryto currencies or has not enough testing been done yet?
Also i do understand that while my trade thread has given an incentive for people to pay people smaller amounts of bitcoin to pay others to complete the captchas for them thus increasing their ability to claim more coins than others, is there anything you have in mind that might be able to curb this behavior and make the distribution less incentivized for these people . I know the trade thread may be partly to blame for this occurrence but any adding to an exchange would of had an equal and perhaps larger effect taking place . and i think the benefits of introducing new users to the project has been beneficial and awareness of the currency