> if two local newspapers close every week, then where else will people turn if not to their local Sinclair station?
This is a questionable substitution. Local TV news is heavily watched by 55+ Americans, with over a third of 18 to 34-year olds having never watched it [1].
I can't share a screenshot of the statistics due to copyright restrictions, but I can confirm that what user JumpCrisscross said (about the statistics) is true.
Edit: my mind might been blurred by too many 4s and 6es, whoops. I thought it said "6 IPv6 addresses".
This still doesn't explain why it's six though, although I can think of four simultaneous IPv6 addresses - transient and persistent GUAs (which are accessible to the internet) a ULA (equivalent to IPv4 private address but which is rare in practice) and a link-local address (for communication to the router).
PoW burns a lot of energy, but the algorithm has an elegant simplicity to it. Crucially, the _work_ is impossible to fake.
PoS (very roughly) means that the richest control the network... which seems reasonable. But suppose you decide to rewrite the blockchain to say you're the richest, do you then control the network? It's a circular loop, and defending against those kinds of attacks is dramatically more complex. I've been lightly following development and I get the sense they've been playing whack-a-mole with vulnerabilities and bugs since ~2016. It's hard to have confidence in the result.
Even if you controlled 51% or even 67% of the staking power, you would not be able to “rewrite” the blockchain to give yourself free money. A common misconception. All state transitions must follow the rules of the chain.
To be clear, I'm not claiming that any particular implementation of PoS is vulnerable to this exact attack. It's an illustrative example of one class of attack that is a danger on PoS chains but not PoW chains, and might help people intuit why PoS implementations are more complex.
Coming back down to earth, this is why ETH requires checkpoints[1], but PoW chains do not[2].
ethereum PoS finality is part of the mechanical consensus protocol and established every epoch or two automatically, vs Bitcoin “checkpoints” that were hardcoded into clients. not really comparable
Miners can not rewrite the blockchain. They only get to choose which transactions go in and which are rejected or delayed. Each transaction must be signed by the wallet owner so miners can not just assign money to themselves.
You're also not allowed to have the best toothpaste in the world. Toothpaste with Novamin can't be sold in the US. Thankfully the internet makes it easy to get the good stuff anyhow.
That's a single metareview paper which was started by an undergraduate. Maybe people find that valuable, but other studies on the topics that used actual experimentation present somewhat mixed reviews trending towards clinical relevance.
In addition to choosing the toothpaste, it’s important to use the right brushing technique and schedule, which is critical since toothpaste does the bulk of the work after the physical process of brushing is done: don’t rinse with water (just spit instead) and arrange brushing so that you don’t eat or drink afterwards.
I just picked up some CariFree CTx4 Gel 1100. It has Nanohydroxyapatite, Fluoride, and Xylitol.
I'm actually quite annoyed that none of the half dozen dentists I've seen in the last 15 years have mentioned Nanohydroxyapatite as a compliment to fluoride.
Thanks for the recommendation, I had never heard of it. And I had the same experience in regards to the hydroxyapatite. No dentists told me, I just discovered it on pubmed and then went googling like crazy.
"NOTE: BioMin® F is not currently available for sale in the US. Although the Fluoride levels in BioMin® F are well below OTC levels in normal toothpaste, Flouride is classified as a drug in the US and has not yet been approved by the FDA."
