Difference between revisions of "Talk:Peercoin"
PostScarcity (talk | contribs) m (→Criticisms outdated) |
PostScarcity (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Criticisms outdated == | == Criticisms outdated == | ||
| − | I've removed the | + | I've removed two of the that were added back in December 2012. The first criticism was vague, and the other was resolved as of version 0.3.0. |
| + | |||
| + | I've quoted them below for posterity: | ||
--------- | --------- | ||
* A hasty release of the coin - a whitepaper was released, and very quickly afterwards a blockchain was started, without giving ample time for people to even notice the coin exists. | * A hasty release of the coin - a whitepaper was released, and very quickly afterwards a blockchain was started, without giving ample time for people to even notice the coin exists. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
* The coin's security model is not yet well understood by the community. One exploit is documented [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=131940.0 in this thread]. | * The coin's security model is not yet well understood by the community. One exploit is documented [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=131940.0 in this thread]. | ||
--------- | --------- | ||
Revision as of 17:16, 14 April 2013
Criticisms outdated
I've removed two of the that were added back in December 2012. The first criticism was vague, and the other was resolved as of version 0.3.0.
I've quoted them below for posterity:
- A hasty release of the coin - a whitepaper was released, and very quickly afterwards a blockchain was started, without giving ample time for people to even notice the coin exists.
- The coin's security model is not yet well understood by the community. One exploit is documented in this thread.
