Community-Punkte ermöglichen es Mitgliedern von Reddit-Communities, einen Teil ihrer Community zu besitzen, Belohnungen für hochwertige Beiträge zu verdienen und spezielle Funktionen freizuschalten.
Read all about it at the above link. There’s way too much to process here. This is going to be wild.
Not an expert but overall yes, the technology seems like a good idea, it’s what it was/is most used that gives it bad rep. The most inhetently bad thing about it might be the environmental unfriendliness with the energy used needed for the verifications and stuff (though there are alternatives to it I think)
But I don’t know much about it beyond the basics, so might be wrong.
Maybe I get downvoted because I’m wrong. Or mayne because I wasn’t inherently negative about blockchain and since it is mostly asociated with NFTs and similar scams, people just automatically hate it. If it’s the former, I deserve it - but would love for someone to say so and explain if that’s the case.
I think you could have explained yourself more clearly. Did you mean to say that otherwise in a vacuum, the only downside to blockchain technology is it’s ecological impact? I’d agree with that, but nothing operates in a hypothetical vacuum.
What’s got some people up in arms is the fact this blockchain is a solution without a problem. It’s going to do things that can already be done easily in a much harder way. Which is what most blockchain deployments do. I think you know that nuance but didn’t articulate it well in your post. Perhaps that’s why you’re being down voted?
Honestly, as I said, I knly know the basics. From what I know about it, at face value and in vacuum, it sounds usable - with the environmental negatives. So more or less, you understood me correctly I think. I may’ve not been too clear, because I only have basic understanding of it - never looked too deep into it.
Maybe (probably) there are more inherent negatives to it that I don’t know about. Maybe the environmental ones just stuck with me because I understand those.
Not an expert but overall yes, the technology seems like a good idea, it’s what it was/is most used that gives it bad rep. The most inhetently bad thing about it might be the environmental unfriendliness with the energy used needed for the verifications and stuff (though there are alternatives to it I think)
But I don’t know much about it beyond the basics, so might be wrong.
Maybe I get downvoted because I’m wrong. Or mayne because I wasn’t inherently negative about blockchain and since it is mostly asociated with NFTs and similar scams, people just automatically hate it. If it’s the former, I deserve it - but would love for someone to say so and explain if that’s the case.
I think you could have explained yourself more clearly. Did you mean to say that otherwise in a vacuum, the only downside to blockchain technology is it’s ecological impact? I’d agree with that, but nothing operates in a hypothetical vacuum.
What’s got some people up in arms is the fact this blockchain is a solution without a problem. It’s going to do things that can already be done easily in a much harder way. Which is what most blockchain deployments do. I think you know that nuance but didn’t articulate it well in your post. Perhaps that’s why you’re being down voted?
Honestly, as I said, I knly know the basics. From what I know about it, at face value and in vacuum, it sounds usable - with the environmental negatives. So more or less, you understood me correctly I think. I may’ve not been too clear, because I only have basic understanding of it - never looked too deep into it.
Maybe (probably) there are more inherent negatives to it that I don’t know about. Maybe the environmental ones just stuck with me because I understand those.