qwertywerty

Women and men should both bear the costs. However, seeing exactly how much a newborn can cut into time a woman would otherwise spend working makes me (against my better judgement) worry about hiring women.

>The quotes show they know it is an odd usage.

Using scare quotes to mean that nobody else says something strikes me as odd, but you're probably correct.

I did forget about ASIC resistant coins. I think my general point still stands.

You're making a logical leap between intentional GPU/CPU coins and inefficiency as an explicit design goal. GPU/CPU coin developers are most likely true believers in a distributed security model. They could also own GPU farms or botnets. I highly doubt developers design cryptocurrencies while dreaming of squandering global resources.

>Beyond that there's cryptocurrency, where finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal to maximise the energy wasted, in order to impose a global rate limit on "minting" virtual tokens.

I don't disagree with the gist of this, but from a your technical description verges on nonsense. I'm questioning if you're serious.

>...finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal...

At no point is anyone searching for an algorithm. Most mining algorithms were chosen at random or for novelty; Bitcoin uses double SHA-256, Litecoin uses scrypt, Primecoin searches for primes.

>...maximise the energy wasted...

Energy is wasted during mining in order to maximize security. The waste is a side effect.

>...in order to impose a global rate limit...

This is plain false.

>..."minting"...

It's called "mining". I wouldn't complain if this wasn't in quotes.

The whitepaper is only nine pages, but nobody seems to read it. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf