IOTA - Unmoderated thread

[SteveoMB]

Be wary of IOTA, they don't like constructive criticism. Red flags are raised:

They dont take kindly on even asking how Iota is supposed to work.

However, they do spread bullshit about Byteball on here, and in their slack forum, they are originater of "Byteball is a blockchain and DAG hybrid" lie.

Iota action smell bad, like something is rotten.

The whole "we'll beat quantum computing" even is a bunch of bs. How can they beat something that can compute several states at the same time almost instantaneously with regular tech that still computes things one at a time? Sounds like they are spreading a bunch of hype to uninformed individuals.

I'm sure someone in their team is working under Ubuntu and somehow convinced their boss about this new fancy shmancy state of the art technology and the many moneys they will make.

The guy I bought some IOTA from said he was selling all of their coins because of internal conflicts with Come-from-Beyond and hinted that the initial investors have a hard time dealing with someone who doesn't want to discuss how the project even works. To the point that they were not allowed to question iota.

Like you said, smells of another BTC scam. What's new in the alt-world, same thing over and over again.

you guys don't wanna get a better image of IOTA. you just stick to your opinion. This looks to me like a conditioned opinion because this isn't about IOTA. this is about byteball or whatever you invested in instead.
everyone INCLUDING dom and david tried their best and talked to you guys to clear uncertain questions but you still come here to trigger everyone.
and I'm asking myself why.
is this just bottom-feeding or is this an honest scientific opinion based on facts?
because all I can see is an ever repeating trump-argumentation with phrases and neural diarrhea.
for the facts I'm willing to start an AmA. You may ask anything and I don't even give a shit about ad hominem. you insult, you ask, I answer anyway.
the first question I saw is "Is quantum-proof bullshit!?"
no.
Winternitz one time signature scheme enables the quantum resistance. here: this for example doesn't say quantum proof or immune, but resistance. and furthermore, that "Current research suggests, that the
security of hash-based signatures will not be significantly harmed by quantum computer supported
attacks [12]." Side 1, bottom. https://eprint.iacr.org/2011/191.pdf
It is about "pseudo randomization" and "key one-wayness" explained on side 4.
Source: "We begin by reviewing the standard definition of digital signature schemes and the security notion
existential unforgeability under adaptive chosen message attacks (EU-CMA) [11]. We then define
two security notions for function families required for our reduction. The first is the well known
pseudo-randomness property. The second is key one-wayness which states that it is hard to find
a key k such that the function fk maps a given input x to a given output y. We also state two
lemmas about these notions which will be useful for the reduction of W-OTS.
"
This is proven.
If you come up with further bullshit, Ill proof you wrong. gogo.
next question!

OK I will bite.

What use does a scheme requiring a Proof-of-Work - which is designed to be computationally and energy-intensive process, provide for computation and energy-starved Internet-of-Things devices?

Let me rephrase that, a digital currency for Internet-of-Things, it even claims to have IoT in its very name, is building its (still not actually functional but ok, can pass) consensus algorithm on Proof-of-Work.

If you still fail to actually see the god damn problem, you must be blinded by marketing of Iota, as better currencies exist which are more suitable for IoT, those which dont require PoW, nor just waste compute power for no real consensus anyway.

EDIT: As for the quantum marketing. At least something done somewhat OK by Iota. Even a broken clock is right 2 times per day.

you haven't been part of the conversation because last time, we failed to find a shared pov ourselves, but I will answer anyway.

PoW is a prevention against sybil attacks. The PoW, which is necessary is not very much and will then be of minor significance, once the IRI will be changed for industrial appliances.
why PoW at all? well, you have a synchronized, soon to be decentralized system, where data-integrity needs to be established through the "confirm 2 tx before you conduct a new one" thingy. pretty solid architecture. what would you take?
for the computational power: you ever heard about JINN?
the ternary processors will conduct the necessary PoW in fractions of a second. Right now, I need just a few seconds with my CPU so that's completely fine for users. the IoT will be handled differently, but everyone was told that like a hundred times.
the consensus furthermore will be established in a decentralized manner, once the monte carlo random walk is enabled, because right now, like you know, the coordinator is centralizing it, for security and topology-reason. (the wittnesses in BB btw too)
So what is your point? that the PoW is to heavy? well it isn't very long.
That we have no decentralization? well we will have it in approx. july 2017
That it's not suitable? why not, what is still missing?

[1715627988]

1715627988

[1715627988]

1715627988

[1715627988]

1715627988

[1715627988]

1715627988

[iotatoken]

When birthcontrol fails

Do you even understand how computation work on a basic level? Forget ternary, forget IoT, forget hashfunctions. Do you understand on a basic level how operations are carried out? IOTA's PoW is negligible as a spam-preventer. There is no economic race to the bottom in the shape of hunting crypto nonces for mining rewards... What are you going to do? Spend 10 000 000 to attempt to disrupt a 0.1 cent transaction?

Do you know how many logic gates are necessary for a component that acts like an ASIC for the IOTA Curl hashfunction? Do you know that there is already more than enough room for this on the die, hence no extra expenses?

[Come-from-Beyond]

When birthcontrol fails

Do you even understand how computation work on a basic level? Forget ternary, forget IoT, forget hashfunctions. Do you understand on a basic level how operations are carried out? IOTA's PoW is negligible as a spam-preventer. There is no economic race to the bottom in the shape of hunting crypto nonces for mining rewards... What are you going to do? Spend 10 000 000 to attempt to disrupt a 0.1 cent transaction?

Do you know how many logic gates are necessary for a component that acts like an ASIC for the IOTA Curl hashfunction? Do you know that there is already more than enough room for this on the die, hence no extra expenses?

Check his "trust" rating.

[SatoNatomato]

PoW is a prevention against sybil attacks. The PoW, which is necessary is not very much and will then be of minor significance, once the IRI will be changed for industrial appliances.
why PoW at all? well, you have a synchronized, soon to be decentralized system, where data-integrity needs to be established through the "confirm 2 tx before you conduct a new one" thingy. pretty solid architecture. what would you take?
for the computational power: you ever heard about JINN?
the ternary processors will conduct the necessary PoW in fractions of a second. Right now, I need just a few seconds with my CPU so that's completely fine for users. the IoT will be handled differently, but everyone was told that like a hundred times.
the consensus furthermore will be established in a decentralized manner, once the monte carlo random walk is enabled, because right now, like you know, the coordinator is centralizing it, for security and topology-reason. (the wittnesses in BB btw too)
So what is your point? that the PoW is to heavy? well it isn't very long.
That we have no decentralization? well we will have it in approx. july 2017
That it's not suitable? why not, what is still missing?

That is funny, since last time I checked Iota, the PoW didnt help against Sybils, and instead people were asked for social proof to join the network, that ist he Sybil prevention. 

No, that is not my point that "pow is heavy", read my post again and try really try hard to see the big picture. No offense, just open your eyes.

Hardware, Jinn, if you place one of these on a chip, someone will place 100 000 of them together in one big chip, call it a Specialized Processing Unit, and it would then be able to outpace and outrun at least 100 000 of other smaller chips. What I mean is, at IoT power levels, can not ever compete with a normal PC, lulz that should be obvious and clear as blue day, no matter if you place "specialized non-existent magic hardware" on it or not.

Hence, PoW and IoT are oxymorons. Pick one. You cant protect your IoT devices with PoW scheme.

But you can, with a signature based scheme such as Byteball, and other cryptocurrency, even DPoS works better. See IOTA developers and fans, say, "Oh but IoT will not be a full node, it will only send/sing transactions", Well duh, obviously, any fucking cryptocurrency can delegate a chip to be dumb and trust another full node. What good cryptocurrencies do is, allow the IoT chip to send/receive transactions with its own keys - by signing shit just as other full wallets, and get the protection from scammers and attackers as the rest of the network. Spicy isnt it.


Of course, IOTA, bragging about IoT so much, and now we hear from its supporter "IoT will be handed differently." WHAT. OK.

[SatoNatomato]

When birthcontrol fails

Im not gonna answer your posts when you begin with insults, the rest of your post is rotten trash.

Which only shows, what can be expected of a project whos leaders talk to other people like this? Smell of rotten fish.

EDIT: This is how you sound like, "Hurr durr, bro, do you even electric circuit? Transistors bro, like, be this small, resistors and shit, IoT, will solve this, computation. Hurr."

[LiQio]

[...]Anyway, I was sent by my employer to pick a software library or existing application [...]

Your employer sent you to BTT to pick a software library or application?
 

[SteveoMB]

PoW is a prevention against sybil attacks. The PoW, which is necessary is not very much and will then be of minor significance, once the IRI will be changed for industrial appliances.
why PoW at all? well, you have a synchronized, soon to be decentralized system, where data-integrity needs to be established through the "confirm 2 tx before you conduct a new one" thingy. pretty solid architecture. what would you take?
for the computational power: you ever heard about JINN?
the ternary processors will conduct the necessary PoW in fractions of a second. Right now, I need just a few seconds with my CPU so that's completely fine for users. the IoT will be handled differently, but everyone was told that like a hundred times.
the consensus furthermore will be established in a decentralized manner, once the monte carlo random walk is enabled, because right now, like you know, the coordinator is centralizing it, for security and topology-reason. (the wittnesses in BB btw too)
So what is your point? that the PoW is to heavy? well it isn't very long.
That we have no decentralization? well we will have it in approx. july 2017
That it's not suitable? why not, what is still missing?

That is funny, since last time I checked Iota, the PoW didnt help against Sybils, and instead people were asked for social proof to join the network, that ist he Sybil prevention. 

No, that is not my point that "pow is heavy", read my post again and try really try hard to see the big picture. No offense, just open your eyes.

Hardware, Jinn, if you place one of these on a chip, someone will place 100 000 of them together in one big chip, call it a Specialized Processing Unit, and it would then be able to outpace and outrun at least 100 000 of other smaller chips. What I mean is, at IoT power levels, can not ever compete with a normal PC, lulz that should be obvious and clear as blue day, no matter if you place "specialized non-existent magic hardware" on it or not.

Hence, PoW and IoT are oxymorons. Pick one. You cant protect your IoT devices with PoW scheme.

But you can, with a signature based scheme such as Byteball, and other cryptocurrency, even DPoS works better. See IOTA developers and fans, say, "Oh but IoT will not be a full node, it will only send/sing transactions", Well duh, obviously, any fucking cryptocurrency can delegate a chip to be dumb and trust another full node. What good cryptocurrencies do is, allow the IoT chip to send/receive transactions with its own keys - by signing shit just as other full wallets, and get the protection from scammers and attackers as the rest of the network. Spicy isnt it.


Of course, IOTA, bragging about IoT so much, and now we hear from its supporter "IoT will be handed differently." WHAT. OK.

PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this.

-------------
"Hardware, Jinn, if you place one of these on a chip, someone will place 100 000 of them together in one big chip, call it a Specialized Processing Unit, and it would then be able to outpace and outrun at least 100 000 of other smaller chips. What I mean is, at IoT power levels, can not ever compete with a normal PC, lulz that should be obvious and clear as blue day, no matter if you place "specialized non-existent magic hardware" on it or not. "

I have no fucking idea what point you wanna proof with this. Yes, you surely can buy 100000 chips and try to compete the PoW but what for? Well first you need to make good plans, buy all those chips, either find the right neighbors or deal with the MCRW from july 2017 on but in every case you have a fuckton of costs and work to do. You say any system is hackable? yeah (including BB and BTC), kind of. but is it worth it?
-------------
JINN are not "specialized non-existent magic hardware"
they are "ternary, existent hardware". Just look for it, you will find the source. personal duty to find information and shit...
-------------
and why the fuck do you say things like "...and now we hear from its supporter..."  everything I wrote can be read on my blog, in dozens of articles, guides, FAQ.
what you can do at least is check for public info and updates before you, again, claim you found something fishy, scammy where nothing is, just to fill your badass competition-obsession with byteball. IF byteball is such a winner, why isnt it mentioned anywhere`?
ah wait, they have a nice chatfunction. wow.
and btw: you didn't deliver any proof, again just phrases.
if you think you're a smart person, you won't be mad if we create good terms for a solid conversation. right?
every phrase needs to be backed up.
That's the only meaningful way.

[SatoNatomato]

PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this.

...
more ramblings without backing anything up with anything more than "because I say so and trust IOTA".
...

Really, PoW works against Sybil? How awesome, now where can I download IOTA full node software and run it and have it connect to the rest of the network? Oh right, you cant. Because pow is not protecting against sybils, and not avoiding a "clustering" of peers which then mess up your non-existent "consensus" aka monte-carlo-randomly-select-a-head algorithm so a coordinator is required. 

You dont "buy 100000 chips", you make one which has such power, an ASIC, or just use an off-the-shelf FPGA and program it - it would give you enough power to block any smaller IoT devices from transacting, or double-spending them. If iota becomes worth anything more than an iota of cow dung, rest assured people will develop "100000 power chips" to attack it just like they developed bitcoin miners.

[SteveoMB]

PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this.

...
more ramblings without backing anything up with anything more than "because I say so and trust IOTA".
...

Really, PoW works against Sybil? How awesome, now where can I download IOTA full node software and run it and have it connect to the rest of the network? Oh right, you cant. Because pow is not protecting against sybils, and not avoiding a "clustering" of peers which then mess up your non-existent "consensus" aka monte-carlo-randomly-select-a-head algorithm so a coordinator is required. 

You dont "buy 100000 chips", you make one which has such power, an ASIC, or just use an off-the-shelf FPGA and program it - it would give you enough power to block any smaller IoT devices from transacting, or double-spending them. If iota becomes worth anything more than an iota of cow dung, rest assured people will develop "100000 power chips" to attack it just like they developed bitcoin miners.

can we stop forming hot air?
back up your arguments. that's minimum scientific requirement and necessary to fuel this conversation.
google scholar, science direct, even stackoverflow could be helpful here.

[altcoinUK]

Only fake news to dump your worthless IOTA to newbies, you greedy bastard.

That's very true from day one and the amount shilling in this thread indicates there is no change in that department.

On the other hand, it seems at least David tries to create something tangible using the scammed money. The idiots and noobs who gave money to David could see the process as a crowdfunding exercise - they crowdfunded an ambitious and reasonably novel project.

[Come-from-Beyond]

That's very true from day one and the amount shilling in this thread indicates there is no change in that department.

On the other hand, it seems at least David tries to create something tangible using the scammed money. The idiots and noobs who gave money to David could see the process as a crowdfunding exercise - they crowdfunded an ambitious and reasonably novel project.

What did you do to the real altcoinUK?

[SatoNatomato]

PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this.

...
more ramblings without backing anything up with anything more than "because I say so and trust IOTA".
...

Really, PoW works against Sybil? How awesome, now where can I download IOTA full node software and run it and have it connect to the rest of the network? Oh right, you cant. Because pow is not protecting against sybils, and not avoiding a "clustering" of peers which then mess up your non-existent "consensus" aka monte-carlo-randomly-select-a-head algorithm so a coordinator is required.  

You dont "buy 100000 chips", you make one which has such power, an ASIC, or just use an off-the-shelf FPGA and program it - it would give you enough power to block any smaller IoT devices from transacting, or double-spending them. If iota becomes worth anything more than an iota of cow dung, rest assured people will develop "100000 power chips" to attack it just like they developed bitcoin miners.

can we stop forming hot air?
back up your arguments. that's minimum scientific requirement and necessary to fuel this conversation.
google scholar, science direct, even stackoverflow could be helpful here.

Well I cant "back up my arguments", that would require that you understand that 5 is bigger than 3, and that IoT means small power constrained devices which are smaller than bigger devices. The last sentence requires that you understand relative sizes. Toddlers aquire said knowledge around age 2.

Maybe I can back it up like this, see this letter here, O, is big, now see it here, o, is small, and look now, its gonna be so miniscule you can hardly see it . magic isnt it?

Now then, let me back this one up, IoT devices are really power-constrained and energy-constrained devices, look here https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoard101 and here https://punchthrough.com/bean wow, 32Mhz, 196kib, all do you think that will need 150W of power to run or less than 2W of power to run, what is your guess? How many of those would you need in a network to outcompete a normal PC? Do you want it to be wasting your battery while it computed dumb proofs when you could instead just not waste power, and send a request over a trusted encrypted link to your cloud or whatever platform you have?

A good one https://www.crowdsupply.com/pinoccio/mesh-sensor-network

[SteveoMB]

PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this.

...
more ramblings without backing anything up with anything more than "because I say so and trust IOTA".
...

Really, PoW works against Sybil? How awesome, now where can I download IOTA full node software and run it and have it connect to the rest of the network? Oh right, you cant. Because pow is not protecting against sybils, and not avoiding a "clustering" of peers which then mess up your non-existent "consensus" aka monte-carlo-randomly-select-a-head algorithm so a coordinator is required. 

You dont "buy 100000 chips", you make one which has such power, an ASIC, or just use an off-the-shelf FPGA and program it - it would give you enough power to block any smaller IoT devices from transacting, or double-spending them. If iota becomes worth anything more than an iota of cow dung, rest assured people will develop "100000 power chips" to attack it just like they developed bitcoin miners.

can we stop forming hot air?
back up your arguments. that's minimum scientific requirement and necessary to fuel this conversation.
google scholar, science direct, even stackoverflow could be helpful here.

Well I cant "back up my arguments", that would require that you understand that 5 is bigger than 3, and that IoT means small power constrained devices which are smaller than bigger devices. The last sentence requires that you understand relative sizes. Toddlers aquire said knowledge around age 2.

Maybe I can back it up like this, see this letter here, O, is big, now see it here, o, is small, and look now, its gonna be so miniscule you can hardly see it . magic isnt it?

Now then, let me back this one up, IoT devices are really power-constrained and energy-constrained devices, look here https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoard101 and here https://punchthrough.com/bean wow, 32Mhz, 196kib, all do you think that will need 150W of power to run or less than 2W of power to run, what is your guess? How many of those would you need in a network to outcompete a normal PC? Do you want it to be wasting your battery while it computed dumb proofs when you could instead just not waste power, and send a request over a trusted encrypted link to your cloud or whatever platform you have?

beside ad hominem, we were at "sybil attacks can be prevented with PoW"
you just keep on babbling hot air, unimportant phrases and ignore solid arguments.
now: why does PoW NOT help against Sybil attacks, like you postulated 2 arguments before?
and you still need to attack me in a chauvi-manner, which is fine for me, as long as you come with some solid sources.

[l8orre]

The last sentence requires that you understand relative sizes. Toddlers aquire said knowledge around age 2.
 

OK, for arguments sake: Assume that IOTA is a scam and a techonology that can never work. So just out of curiosity:

What now? What is your mission here?

Expose a scam and protect the gullible?

Save all those involved from wasting their time and money?

Make it so that all IOTA holders destroy their IOTAs and the project be shut down?

Apart from spewing destructivism hinged on buzzwords, you fail to provide the logical consequence of what you are implying. This makes you appear quite deranged and sinister.


Hm - maybe we should have a look at your post history- like this one, which was your first post, over on the Byteball thread:

has someone compiled the wallets from src and checked if the apps ( android / win / linux ) from the release matches?

Yes, I did it for Linux, it matches close enough, its not a reproducible build like Bitcoin or Tor yet.

Joining here, to say amazing great work to tonych, looking forward to build many platforms with this technology.

 
  we, the community of honest cryptonerds, 

How can I get a membership badge for that club? Please?

[SatoNatomato]

The last sentence requires that you understand relative sizes. Toddlers aquire said knowledge around age 2.
 

OK, for arguments sake: Assume that IOTA is a scam and a techonology that can never work. So just out of curiosity:

What now? What is your mission here?

Expose a scam and protect the gullible?

Save all those involved from wasting their time and money?

Make it so that all IOTA holders destroy their IOTAs and the project be shut down?

Apart from spewing destructivism hinged on buzzwords, you fail to provide the logical consequence of what you are implying. This makes you appear quite deranged and sinister.

Well, if you want to discuss me as a person you can start a thread about that.

But as you probably will not do that, as most other IOTA scammers prefer to insult and talk about persons instead of software and ideas.

As I stated previously many many times, I came with open mind both to IOTA and to Byteball. You IOTA people have something to hide and started attacking me personally and throwing insults left and right, besides not actually answering any technical questions. All reeks of scam. Now, about 1 month in, of course I am still on Byteball thread while am banned from IOTA thread. So now you are using this as a kind of attack on me personally "see fans of iota, that guy is with the *OTHER* dag-project", which is appealing to basic "us-vs-them" primitive brain of humans.

You know what my mission is? To talk, this is bitcointalk after all. Understandably, scammers/IOTA people have a problem with that - people talking and asking questions about technology.

[SteveoMB]

The last sentence requires that you understand relative sizes. Toddlers aquire said knowledge around age 2.
 

OK, for arguments sake: Assume that IOTA is a scam and a techonology that can never work. So just out of curiosity:

What now? What is your mission here?

Expose a scam and protect the gullible?

Save all those involved from wasting their time and money?

Make it so that all IOTA holders destroy their IOTAs and the project be shut down?

Apart from spewing destructivism hinged on buzzwords, you fail to provide the logical consequence of what you are implying. This makes you appear quite deranged and sinister.

Well, if you want to discuss me as a person you can start a thread about that.

But as you probably will not do that, as most other IOTA scammers prefer to insult and talk about persons instead of software and ideas.

As I stated previously many many times, I came with open mind both to IOTA and to Byteball. You IOTA people have something to hide and started attacking me personally and throwing insults left and right, besides not actually answering any technical questions. All reeks of scam. Now, about 1 month in, of course I am still on Byteball thread while am banned from IOTA thread. So now you are using this as a kind of attack on me personally "see fans of iota, that guy is with the *OTHER* dag-project", which is appealing to basic "us-vs-them" primitive brain of humans.

You know what my mission is? To talk, this is bitcointalk after all. Understandably, scammers/IOTA people have a problem with that - people talking and asking questions about technology.

We WERE talking about a technical question. Why is POW not able to withstand sybilattacks, like you told me?

[SatoNatomato]

now: why does PoW NOT help against Sybil attacks, like you postulated 2 arguments before?

Because this O is smaller than o, please read the previous post again explaining the difference in power-levels of small things vs big things.

Im sorry, but I cant comprehend instead of you, comprehension is something you have to do.

A quick idea how to comprehend faster, if PoW was Sybil-preventing, why does IOTA still require humans to peer with each other on a slack channel?

EDIT: some more, PoW, how much work do you think a 1W device with shitty CPU+"Jinn", can do and how much work can a 1 400W device do with specialized hardware? You know the answer but dont want to see it, orders of magnitude more - which means any single ASIC or FPGA, could outrun and double-spend many IoT devices. Which means, the Work that IoT controller puts into using IOTA, is wasted energy, its an oxymoron.

[Come-from-Beyond]

now: why does PoW NOT help against Sybil attacks, like you postulated 2 arguments before?

Because this O is smaller than o, please read the previous post again explaining the difference in power-levels of small things vs big things.

Do you see now how it's hard to explain things when you understand nothing in them? 

PS: Keep explaining, I'm waiting for the next your fuckup.

[SatoNatomato]

now: why does PoW NOT help against Sybil attacks, like you postulated 2 arguments before?

Because this O is smaller than o, please read the previous post again explaining the difference in power-levels of small things vs big things.

Do you see now how it's hard to explain things when you understand nothing in them? 

PS: Keep explaining, I'm waiting for the next your fuckup.

Your trolling is low, can you step up your game? I need more motivation when programming, your posts dont rile me up anymore.

A programmer out of spite is a programmer of might.

[SteveoMB]

now: why does PoW NOT help against Sybil attacks, like you postulated 2 arguments before?

Because this O is smaller than o, please read the previous post again explaining the difference in power-levels of small things vs big things.

Im sorry, but I cant comprehend instead of you, comprehension is something you have to do.

A quick idea how to comprehend faster, if PoW was Sybil-preventing, why does IOTA still require humans to peer with each other on a slack channel?

EDIT: some more, PoW, how much work do you think a 1W device with shitty CPU+"Jinn", can do and how much work can a 1 400W device do with specialized hardware? You know the answer but dont want to see it, orders of magnitude more - which means any single ASIC or FPGA, could outrun and double-spend many IoT devices. Which means, the Work that IoT controller puts into using IOTA, is wasted energy, its an oxymoron.

fucking hell, is this your technical and scientific approach to explain Hashcash against sybil?
U give us counterquestions and again chauvi-attitude but you still fail to deliver any proof.
Your poor try to discredit me based on "O and o" is funny.
Bring me a paper that explains why PoW isnt suitable against sybil and I listen. Until then, have fun in your loser-life.