The Problem with Crypto: It's All Proof of Burn

How long is the article? Is it just four paragraphs of misconceptions about blockchain?

This is amazing. I mean is it sufficient to talk shit about blockchain to get onto the HN front page?

Proof of Stake is real. "Proof of Burn" is bizarre. I don't even understand what he is talking about here (but again I'm not even sure I'm seeing the whole article).

Sharding and Zero Knowledge Proofs means you won't have to keep a ledger of everything ever. Sharding in particular. Sharding is just the delegation of parts of the blockchain to different nodes so not all nodes have to keep the entire blockchain.

There are chains (ALGO in particular) where virtually all of these solutions are already implemented. Ethereum is right now already seeing Layer2 solutions that implement Zero Knowledge Proofs as a way to dramatically decrease needed data.

Are we really rehashing criticisms of Bitcoin as a way to criticize CURRENT BLOCKCHAIN tech? This like trying to criticize iOS dev by talking about limitations of Obj-C 10 years ago. This is insanity. HN deserves better than this.

Very light reading with large, unsubstantiated leaps and derivative opinions. The fact that work of this quality is getting traction just makes the HN anti-crypto bias evident. Do they even click through?

I won't be until it all crashes that this suddenly becomes obvious.

There's no actual argument in this article. His whole argument is "The title and subheading say it all, really."

tl;dr: man with straw man argument knocks down straw man