[IngvarLynn]

It's a shame that Torproject has decided to reinvent its own wheel, lagging 10 years behind the crypto crowd, instead of integrating with existing coin(s).

The problem is, such integration would require the chosen coin to be anonymous, which is essentially forbidden: https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/23/23843161/tornado-cash-ind...

[gobip]

You understood nothing and gave your opinion. Congratulations, tell us more about how offtopic you are?

This proof of work doesn't mean crypto currency, it doesn't mean coins, it doesn't mean buying or selling tokens. It means proof of work. More exactly, having to put your computer at work in order to solve an equation. If you do that, the server lets you in. If you don't, you can't enter.

This is the original proof of work. It's also proof of work when you solve a captcha, it's just a different proof of work, a human, mental one. Here, it's a computer one, meaning in order to access a website a thousand times, you would have to run the proof of work a thousand times, so a thousand times more ressource.

I really wished you gave the article a read, before saying Torproject is a shame. Maybe you are?

[IngvarLynn]

>This proof of work doesn't mean crypto currency

Well, yes, I should've said 30 years, not 10.

You can start educating yourself on cryptocurrencies with the monero case: monero payments were used instead of captcha on an internet forum about 10 years ago.

[Zuiii]

I agree with you in principle. Wasting energy like what this and hashcash do is unfortunate but that's what happens when you have an irrational hate towards a technology rather than how it is used.

That said, modeling it after a general cryptocurrency is probably a bad idea since it rising prices may prevent legitimate clients from being able to connect to onion services due to the challenge being too expensive (either in terms of computation or accusation). I think a much practical approach is to have each visitor contribute to a partial solution that can then be combined to derive funds (much like how mining pools work). That way, clients will be completely isolated from cryptocurrency and sites can actually benefit from the work rather than just throwing it away. It's a win-win situation.

I hope the next generation learns from our senseless technology-burnings.

[IngvarLynn]

>modeling it after a general cryptocurrency is probably a bad idea

Not modelling after but integrating of an existing one. Because this saves massive amount of engineering effort.

>rising prices may prevent legitimate clients from being able to connect to onion services due to the challenge being too expensive

Obviously, the price for legitimate clients would be much cheaper, as their requests shall be placed in the middle of priority queue (clients can wait a few seconds) while the attacker have to occupy the very top of this queue all the time. Also note that the bigger the DDoS in this scheme - the bigger profits server could make, which he could spend on expanding capacity.

>each visitor contribute to a partial solution that can then be combined to derive funds

This scheme predates monero, which was about 10 years ago.

>the next generation learns from our senseless technology-burnings.

Not if they would reinvent the wheel each time instead of adapting of existing tech to current needs.

[pyinstallwoes]

What? Adopting a coin is nonsense. Your argument is also invalid based on the amount of coins that exist, each reinventing POW.

[dotnet00]

I think it's pretty great that Tor hasn't tied itself to crypto that deeply given how the vast majority of crypto users don't actually give a shit about privacy, only the appearance of it.

[shim__]

Integrating with a coin would defeat the propose, since getting coins for PoW would make the ddos financially rewarding. Allowing the attacker to outcompete normal user who just want to access the site.