Re: PoW (Re: Attack research on HTTP/2 implementations)

It probably isn't, but just in case this is a bit of less
well known history...

On 10/08/2021 01:00, Martin Thomson wrote:
> Most of these never went anywhere for a range of reasons.  One of
> those being that proof of work is an abomination (and I don't say
> that lightly).
I think there were also ideas of less onerous proofs that
went by the name "client puzzles" but that also fell by the
wayside, IIRC due to what's by now likely expired IPR.

Cheers,
S.