Proof-of-history using verifiable delay functions (VDF) is a valid consensus mechanism that scales of PoS and PoW networks [1]. Solana is build on top of it and it looks very promising as a fast consensus mechanism.
OP pretty much explains the intuition behind why history as a sequence of events in a blockchain works, but Bitcoin PoW is different from PoH as maintaining order is the main work done and not a side-effect.
Maybe try reading the post again? I have no affiliation or even opinion about that coin, but it is painfully clear for that post only that the proposed problem of value is
"valid consensus mechanism that scales of PoS and PoW networks".
Half of the comments on this page complain about how Bitcoin uses too much energy and how PoW is wasteful. This is a direct (allegedly, if what they write is correct) solution to exactly that.
You're dismissing a whole branch of computer science on decentralised systems with no argumentation as to why. Consensus algorithms, solutions to the CAP trilemma, uncensorable decentralised applications that run as long as people are willing to use them, trustless oracles, decentralised dispute resolution, democratised loans and finance. Those are some applications that grew out the cryptocurrency space.
On a somewhat related note, I just wonder for my personal interest, why do you write it that way? "BitCoin". You are just signalling everyone that you haven't done any deep research, you have not read any meaningful amount of articles or books or studied it in depth... It is spelled "bitcoin". "BitCoin" is how a housewife would spell it (no disrespect or negativity towards housewives, it is simply an example of a person who does not know much about bitcoin and has just heard the name on the tele or something).
I probably understood even more than you were willing to share: your level of knowledge about this topic.
> gender role trolling
What does gender has to do with anything? You brough it up, not me. Also where did I "troll" you? The word "housewife"? Not sure why you would take offence in that, for me it is not a negative or lower-value term, it simply refers to a person that has chosen and has had the possibility and privilege to spend most of their time at home taking care of their family. I could just as easily have used "hairdresser" or "bricklayer", those people have equally likely little to do with crypto and have the same level of knowledge about bitcoin that you seem (assuming by that spelling, in which I could be wrong of course) to have. That's why I wonder, where did you pick that up? That spelling? Nobody in the industry spells it that way, that's all.
I wanted to share a cool algorithm related to the time as consensus. My intention was not to shill a specific project.
I follow alternative consensus algorithms and trustless decentralized app tech in the blockchain space because I think it is interesting and democratizing tech. I do not own half of the coins I follow and couldn't care less for speculation. Technologically, cryptocurrency is still an exiting domain and scepticism is in place, but the blind hate for anything blockchain on HN is a bit OTT.
OP pretty much explains the intuition behind why history as a sequence of events in a blockchain works, but Bitcoin PoW is different from PoH as maintaining order is the main work done and not a side-effect.
1. https://medium.com/solana-labs/proof-of-history-a-clock-for-...