I'll say it again. Proof-of-work is a field of study and almost nobody is studying it. Read #softwar

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

At least on Nostr nobody cares...

Sorry, this sounds ambiguous and dismissive. I agree with you. It is a pretty interesting subject, but nobody seems to care about it in the Nostr ecosystem.

Hiding in plain sight is a power projection tactic šŸ‘€

The annoying thing about that book is where he butchers the natural world analogies he uses to support his thesis. If he’s winging it on those and not even bothering to get the nuances those right, then I can’t take him seriously on his real shit. It’s such an unforced error, ironically due to a lack of work.

Interesting. What's an example of this from the book?

Been awhile so i can’t remember exactly, but it was related to the ā€œeverything in nature is a war of eat or be eatenā€ when that’s a gross oversimplification that overlooks all the cooperative/symbiotic and other contrarian examples in nature. The oversimplification of the natural world dynamics to fit the power projection thesis annoyed me at the time, but I’d have to do work to give a better critique and I’m too lazy to go back and read that part again šŸ˜‚

He talked about symbiotic relationships in nature too

The natural analogies merely serve to illuminate the concept of benefit to cost ratio of attack and how abstractions remove cost of attack and lead to ruin. By adding that cost back, the natural order can be restored.

In fact, the more contradictory it is, while still adhering to that law, the more durable the thesis becomes.

Wouldnt Lowery argue war is the field

I think he would see it as the study of bitcoin. I don't think Lowery sees a distinction between bitcoin and proof of work, but it exists.

He did explicitly say hes a proof of work maxi now so I think he knows there's a difference but just sees the pow as the most important aspect? Maybe?

Then he would probably agree the field of pow needs more serious study