Why? It’s not like they do useful work.
@overflow64 @AgreeableLandscape they secure the network. that’s what the mechanism was invented for.
They secure their network for them. No one else. So why should any other non-crypto node on the network care?
@AgreeableLandscape
What do you mean with “for them only” ? If there were no miners, who would validate transactions on the network?Nobody and the world would be a better place.
Do you have any particular reason for that? Would also like to know who is “them”?
Why should mineable Cryptos exist when we have non energy and hardware intensive alternatives?
@AgreeableLandscape can you mention a specific alternative?
Proof of stake? New Ethereum?
@AgreeableLandscape personally I prefer proof of work over proof of stake because if an attacker gets a huge amount of coins i dont see a way in which you can kick out the attacker from the network. with proof of work the rest of the network can change the mining algorithm and then the attackers investment will be worth nothing. this possibility gives more security because there is much less incentive to try to attack the network. i dont see how you can achieve the same with PoS.
@AgreeableLandscape That’s a bad alternative as @AndersRytterHansen says. While PoW and PoS tend to centralize, it is more of an issue for PoS. This is partly because networks put a higher weight on token quantity than on validator numbers which in the end minimizes network governance to a few holders. Ethereum is not a decentralized network imo (a characteristic it shares with many other networks unfortunately).
Like they said, nothing useful.
@sexy_peach
Depends on who you ask. For those who make the transactions it’s pretty useful
