kn98

joined 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

No, because one transaction uses as much energy as a normal household in a year. Or something like that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Both based on Bing’s search engine

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Initial distribution was through a captcha-protected crypto ‘faucet’. The faucet is still up. Did the developers keep a large part of the coins themselves? I’ve never heard that.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (2 children)

No, because I’m not a trader. It’s not all about the exchange rate for me, but about the utility of the coin.

Most coins exist because other coins exist. Nano and Monero not necessarily.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (12 children)

I only like two cryptocurrencies.

Nano: free transactions, each wallet runs it’s own blockchain, so it’s got no negative impact on the environment.

Monero: allows for anonymous transfers

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Right. But if things do start to cost money, should that be stopped by laws?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

I see, thanks.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Dutch court convicts engieneer, not Dutch engieneer gets convicted.

Honest question, what do you mean by this? What’s the difference really?