Pages:
Author

Topic: A Consensus Protocol Based on the Ability of Network Dispersity. - page 2. (Read 294 times)

full member
Activity: 351
Merit: 134
I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.
I don't quite catch the point of you but if there were any misunderstandings caused by the grammar and syntax, I'm very sorry about that becsuse I'm not a native English speaker.
If you have any point of view that is against mine, would you please tell me in a direct way because I don't want to miss the main idea again. Thanks.

You cannot objectively verify claimed network latency, so you cannot build a consensus using this concept. I think you have realised this, so you've stake weighted your consensus to compensate.... At best this will leave you with the security model of PoS. At worst you will have all kinds of sybil attack problems related to the nuances of your implementation.
member
Activity: 199
Merit: 15
Proof of Stake protocol is less secure than Proof of Work. Calling it more successful is naive. It has it's costs and it's benefits.
It trades security for energy consumption, it isn't better, it is just different.
I have never said that PoS is better than PoW.
I said PoS is the most successful one of the other alternative protocols, isn't it ?
Quote
All the other protocols are following the same logic, like Proof of Activity, Proof of Burn, Proof of Storage, Proof of Elapsed Time, and so on. "Proof of Stake" (PoS) protocol is the most successful one of them...
sr. member
Activity: 490
Merit: 389
Do not trust the government
I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.
I don't quite catch the point of you but if there were any misunderstandings caused by the grammar and syntax, I'm very sorry about that becsuse I'm not a native English speaker.
If you have any point of view that is against mine, would you please tell me in a direct way because I don't want to miss the main idea again. Thanks.

Proof of Stake protocol is less secure than Proof of Work. Calling it more successful is naive. It has it's costs and it's benefits.
It trades security for energy consumption, it isn't better, it is just different.
member
Activity: 199
Merit: 15
I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.
I don't quite catch the point of you but if there were any misunderstandings caused by the grammar and syntax, I'm very sorry about that becsuse I'm not a native English speaker.
If you have any point of view that is against mine, would you please tell me in a direct way because I don't want to miss the main idea again. Thanks.
full member
Activity: 351
Merit: 134
Quote
“Proof of Stake” (PoS) protocol is the most successful one of them because it doesn’t
need any external resources and consumes low energy

I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.
member
Activity: 199
Merit: 15
hi:
This is the research paper about the project I posted before.
Thank you for your time.
[disabled]
If there are any questions, please let me know. Thanks.

previous post:[disabled]
Pages:
Jump to: