> It uses GPUs.

Many miners buy purpose built servers for crypto mining.

> Was there not enough warning before the changes?

That's the main plaint of the article, and reiterated multiple times. The article claims that the prices was dropped with 2 of the forks, each time it was promised (including at the very beginning) that changes would never be made. Each fork seemed to be of gain to the people who were part of the ICO, but at an income loss to miners. There were several broken promises of no further forks.

Almost all the value in those servers is the GPUs.

I didn't ask whether promises were eventually broken, I asked how long the warning was.

Also if we talk about the promises, I'm pretty sure proof of work was supposed to be dead years ago. The current state is more than promised.

I'm not sure the GPUs could be reused for some other purpose that generates as much value. Perhaps another alt-coin is the best way to redeploy this resources

> I'm pretty sure proof of work was supposed to be dead years ago. The current state is more than promised.

That's a fair point