Are PoS coins secure and reliable? | Bitcointalksearch.org

Este Nuno

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1002

amarha

Quote from: XbladeX on July 18, 2014, 06:42:20 AM

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 05:24:23 AM

....
gen 2.0 PoS coins can and do more than legacy PoW coins, and use less energy too.

To be fair any of those feature can be done for POW coin too difference is that in POW
coin developers don't have so much motivation to hard work because miners can dump on them...
and devaluate their work while POS developers are building their kingdoms with vision in head.

POS coins usually like to make shock features which leads to PUMP but that feature in reality
can be ported between any other POW / POS coin on existing protocol.
DRK and anon is great example of feature race...

On blockchain you can make many magic tweaks also assent exchange p2p smart contracts ext...

gen 2.0 POS in real as "features" doesn't matter so much in that case
need fast protocol, low energy cost and low resource requirements and good security
those are challenges !
not pump features who no one in real use...

I do agree that features and the core of the protocol are entirely separate things. But not all features are worthless necesarrily. We'll see over time what features real people will use and which are just for show.

But yes, I agree with you that:

"fast protocol, low energy cost and low resource requirements and good security"

Are the most important things.

XbladeX

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1002

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 05:24:23 AM

....
gen 2.0 PoS coins can and do more than legacy PoW coins, and use less energy too.

To be fair any of those feature can be done for POW coin too difference is that in POW
coin developers don't have so much motivation to hard work because miners can dump on them...
and devaluate their work while POS developers are building their kingdoms with vision in head.

POS coins usually like to make shock features which leads to PUMP but that feature in reality
can be ported between any other POW / POS coin on existing protocol.
DRK and anon is great example of feature race...

On blockchain you can make many magic tweaks also assent exchange p2p smart contracts ext...

gen 2.0 POS in real as "features" doesn't matter so much in that case
need fast protocol, low energy cost and low resource requirements and good security
those are challenges !
not pump features who no one in real use...

Este Nuno

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1002

amarha

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 05:24:23 AM

Quote from: newuser01 on July 18, 2014, 05:11:20 AM

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 04:23:02 AM

If 3g can do all the same 4g can do and even much more and use less energy, which would you prefer?

they can't and don't, your argument is invalid.
(fyi 4g wouldn't exist if that was the case)

3g and 4g were figurative here:
3g = gen 2.0 poS coins
4g = legacy PoW coins.

gen 2.0 PoS coins can and do more than legacy PoW coins, and use less energy too.

Yes. And remember the root statement of this train of thought was my "all else being equal" when considering PoS and PoW. And by that we're talking about a hypothetical future scenario(which I think is likely) where PoS has gone through the motions and is proven to be a secure and viable system like PoW is already.

It seems that PoS is very close to being there. Just a little bit more time and full implementation of hypothetical solutions to the problems that people debate about today and we're almost there. Then we'll need some time to let it get thoroughly tested and then the cryptocurrency community can move on from PoW.

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: newuser01 on July 18, 2014, 05:11:20 AM

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 04:23:02 AM

If 3g can do all the same 4g can do and even much more and use less energy, which would you prefer?

they can't and don't, your argument is invalid.
(fyi 4g wouldn't exist if that was the case)

3g and 4g were figurative here:
3g = gen 2.0 poS coins
4g = legacy PoW coins.

gen 2.0 PoS coins can and do more than legacy PoW coins, and use less energy too.

XbladeX

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1002

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 04:23:02 AM

Quote from: AliceWonder on July 18, 2014, 04:18:53 AM

Yes, a PoS system will use less energy, but that doesn't make it superior.

3g cell towers use less energy than 4g cell towers. Which kind of cell service do you prefer?

If 3g can do all the same 4g can do and even much more and use less energy, which would you prefer?

Pow coins just waste power for nothing whole job which they do have no real sense.
In POW higher power consumption doesn't mean that BTC is 1000x faster than it was 4years ago... but it consume 10000x more power
that energy is wasted !...

Now POW vs POW is more like
100W lamp vs 10W LED light and same amount of LUX in output

in POS tablet = big GPU/Asic farm in POW
where is future ? BOTH devices can do SAME job...
...in what direction world is going is obvious.

Here ? POW

Or: POS

newuser01

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: Brilliantrocket on July 17, 2014, 02:23:41 PM

PoS is garbage. The only reason for its existence is to separate fools from their money.

QFT

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 04:23:02 AM

Quote from: AliceWonder on July 18, 2014, 04:18:53 AM

Yes, a PoS system will use less energy, but that doesn't make it superior.

3g cell towers use less energy than 4g cell towers. Which kind of cell service do you prefer?

If 3g can do all the same 4g can do and even much more and use less energy, which would you prefer?

they can't and don't, your argument is invalid.
(fyi 4g wouldn't exist if that was the case)

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: AliceWonder on July 18, 2014, 04:18:53 AM

Yes, a PoS system will use less energy, but that doesn't make it superior.

3g cell towers use less energy than 4g cell towers. Which kind of cell service do you prefer?

If 3g can do all the same 4g can do and even much more and use less energy, which would you prefer?

AliceWonder

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote

I think it's self evident that all else being equal a PoS system that uses a fraction of the energy that a PoW system does is superior.

Yes, a PoS system will use less energy, but that doesn't make it superior.

3g cell towers use less energy than 4g cell towers. Which kind of cell service do you prefer?

AliceWonder

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: sillybear on July 18, 2014, 02:11:34 AM

If it is a CPU coin, you are invite botnets.

I believe botnets are only an issue if your coin is valuable enough as they aren't cheap to run, which probably means a 51% isn't obtainable by a botnet as cpu coins with lots of value would tend to have a lot of users who mine.

Este Nuno

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1002

amarha

Quote from: AliceWonder on July 18, 2014, 01:32:44 AM

Quote from: Este Nuno on July 17, 2014, 04:23:22 AM

People should be working together to push PoS technology forward as it's clearly superior to PoW.

Clearly? Seems it serves the interests of the wealthy over the poor (as to some PoW systems) but to state it is clearly superior, I assume you have some kind of mathematical proof?

There were people who said the European brain was clearly superior to the African brain. When properly invested with science, that was clearly debunked.

Statements like clearly need proof.

Quote

I find it hard to believe that someone could justify the excess of PoW if and when a PoS alternative exists. Other than making an argument for PoW purely out of self interest of course.

I think you want to reduce excess, there are bigger sources of excess to worry about that most of you probably justify to yourselves.

Quote

Right now PoW is dominant. And there are some PoS currencies like NXT that are progressing well and appear to have a good chance of solidifying their place as the first secure decentralised PoS currency. Time will tell how it plays out, but it's looking good for PoS thus far I think.

Yes, PoW is dominant yet there are several examples where PoS has resulted in serious issues.
That's not a good argument to continue the PoS experiment.

Quote

It's possible that PoS isn't feasible but so far even for 'Nothing at Stake' attacks, V. Buterin and Come-From-Beyond seemed to agree that there was a theoretical solution. And that seems to be the main issue right now against PoS.

I think PoS is a buzz word, like cloud and many others. Buzz words are good for marketing, for the pump before the dump.

I think it's self evident that all else being equal a PoS system that uses a fraction of the energy that a PoW system does is superior. Is all else equal yet? No it's not, which is why we should be progressing towards a state where PoS is tested and demonstrably secure.

If it's not possible then that will be shown over time. At this point it's looking very good for PoS. If some of the best minds in the cryptocurrency arena are debating the issue and coming up with issues that seem to have apparent solutions then it appears that progress is being made.

If someone told you ten years ago that they were working on a trustless decentralised digital currency you might have thought it was too good to be true or just buzz words as you say.

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: XbladeX on July 18, 2014, 02:43:45 AM

Quote from: Amph on July 18, 2014, 02:25:15 AM

you can rely on hash limit, to take out big gpu farm and asic, new generation of coins should do hash limit, as a mandatory feature

All feature can be abused unfortunately...

VPNs, Proxiex, VirtualMashines... there won't be a perfect world in crypto.

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 01:57:17 AM

... They cry scam to everything that doesn't let them mine and dump for a profit.
And naturally PoS coins don't let them mine and dump, hence they cry foul as soon as they see the word 'PoS' in a sentence.

+1

you can ban suspicious account

XbladeX

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Amph on July 18, 2014, 02:25:15 AM

you can rely on hash limit, to take out big gpu farm and asic, new generation of coins should do hash limit, as a mandatory feature

All feature can be abused unfortunately...

VPNs, Proxiex, VirtualMashines... there won't be a perfect world in crypto.

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 01:57:17 AM

... They cry scam to everything that doesn't let them mine and dump for a profit.
And naturally PoS coins don't let them mine and dump, hence they cry foul as soon as they see the word 'PoS' in a sentence.

+1

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

you can rely on hash limit, to take out big gpu farm and asic, new generation of coins should do hash limit, as a mandatory feature

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: sillybear on July 18, 2014, 02:11:34 AM

If the Algo is support by ASIC, the coin will be dominated by ASIC.
If it is supported by GPU, it would be dominated by big GPU farm
If it is a CPU coin, you are invite botnets.
If it is PoS, miners don't like it and big holder has advantage

Yes, so basically you'll have to try very hard to invent a new coin to see a happy miner, looks like they don't like anything these days, haha

Fortunately, the purpose of a coin is not to make miners happy. If someone invents a coin with the purpose to make miners happy, the coin will eventually be a failure.

sillybear

member

Activity: 105

Merit: 10

Quote from: devphp on July 18, 2014, 01:57:17 AM

Quote from: Kellyjazz on July 18, 2014, 01:50:24 AM

It is true that it's easier to attack PoS coin, but it's sorta impossible for new coin to use PoW,otherwise, those with ASIC miner will dominate the coin.

Quote from: devphp on July 17, 2014, 02:35:40 AM

There are different implementations of PoS, some are vulnerable, some are more secure than PoW.

It's not impossible for new coins to use PoW, especially if they run on an algo that ASICs haven't been invented for yet, or something like Myriadcoin with 5 independant algos. Myriadcoin is not susceptible to 51% attack, but you never hear much about it. Why? Because most posts here are from miners, who don't give a flying fuck about the future of a coin, all they care about is profits from mining. They can't fairly and accurately assess fundamentals and advantages of a coin and don't even try to. They cry scam to everything that doesn't let them mine and dump for a profit. And naturally PoS coins don't let them mine and dump, hence they cry foul as soon as they see the word 'PoS' in a sentence.

If the Algo is support by ASIC, the coin will be dominated by ASIC.
If it is supported by GPU, it would be dominated by big GPU farm
If it is a CPU coin, you are invite botnets.
If it is PoS, miners don't like it and big holder has advantage

Quote from: AliceWonder on July 18, 2014, 01:32:44 AM

Yes, PoW is dominant yet there are several examples where PoS has resulted in serious issues.
That's not a good argument to continue the PoS experiment.

PoW has its vulnerabilities too. And cryptocurrency as a whole has lots of serious problems too (eg inputs.io, mtgox). Are you going to say since there are so much issues in crypto currency, we should stop "experiment" or using cryptocurrencies all together?

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: Kellyjazz on July 18, 2014, 01:50:24 AM

It is true that it's easier to attack PoS coin, but it's sorta impossible for new coin to use PoW,otherwise, those with ASIC miner will dominate the coin.

Quote from: devphp on July 17, 2014, 02:35:40 AM

There are different implementations of PoS, some are vulnerable, some are more secure than PoW.

It's not impossible for new coins to use PoW, especially if they run on an algo that ASICs haven't been invented for yet, or something like Myriadcoin with 5 independant algos. Myriadcoin is not susceptible to 51% attack, but you never hear much about it. Why? Because most posts here are from miners, who don't give a flying fuck about the future of a coin, all they care about is profits from mining. They can't fairly and accurately assess fundamentals and advantages of a coin and don't even try to. They cry scam to everything that doesn't let them mine and dump for a profit. And naturally PoS coins don't let them mine and dump, hence they cry foul as soon as they see the word 'PoS' in a sentence.

Kellyjazz

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

It is true that it's easier to attack PoS coin, but it's sorta impossible for new coin to use PoW,otherwise, those with ASIC miner will dominate the coin.

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: AliceWonder on July 18, 2014, 01:32:44 AM

Yes, PoW is dominant yet there are several examples where PoS has resulted in serious issues.
That's not a good argument to continue the PoS experiment.

PoW coins have had a lot of serious issues too, but that doesn't stop people to continue the PoW experiments, so why stop with the PoS experiments, your statement sounds illogical

Neither Bitcoin nor other PoW nor any PoS coins have entered mainstream yet, and if/when they do, people won't care what crypto to use as long as it's convenient (they won't be able to mine (in the case of PoW) any of it, buying already is/will be the only option for 99.9% of them), secure, has a lot of services on top.

AliceWonder

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: Este Nuno on July 17, 2014, 04:23:22 AM

People should be working together to push PoS technology forward as it's clearly superior to PoW.

Clearly? Seems it serves the interests of the wealthy over the poor (as to some PoW systems) but to state it is clearly superior, I assume you have some kind of mathematical proof?

There were people who said the European brain was clearly superior to the African brain. When properly invested with science, that was clearly debunked.

Statements like clearly need proof.

Quote

I find it hard to believe that someone could justify the excess of PoW if and when a PoS alternative exists. Other than making an argument for PoW purely out of self interest of course.

I think you want to reduce excess, there are bigger sources of excess to worry about that most of you probably justify to yourselves.

Quote

Right now PoW is dominant. And there are some PoS currencies like NXT that are progressing well and appear to have a good chance of solidifying their place as the first secure decentralised PoS currency. Time will tell how it plays out, but it's looking good for PoS thus far I think.

Yes, PoW is dominant yet there are several examples where PoS has resulted in serious issues.
That's not a good argument to continue the PoS experiment.

Quote

It's possible that PoS isn't feasible but so far even for 'Nothing at Stake' attacks, V. Buterin and Come-From-Beyond seemed to agree that there was a theoretical solution. And that seems to be the main issue right now against PoS.

I think PoS is a buzz word, like cloud and many others. Buzz words are good for marketing, for the pump before the dump.

XbladeX

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1002

Quote from: sgi02 on July 17, 2014, 03:42:49 PM

Quote from: XbladeX on July 17, 2014, 02:46:33 PM

In POS2.0 you can not accumulating a lot of coin-days being offline.
Only online coins can accumulate.

At least with BC; I found it interesting that they were moving to SHA256 for POS 2.0 vs Scrypt. Not sure what the technical reasoning was behind this, but interesting none the less.

http://www.blackcoin.co/blackcoin-pos-protocol-v2-whitepaper.pdf

D. Hash Function
The original NovaCoin protocol called for the use of
”Scrypt” [5] as its Proof-Of-Work; also being used as the
block hash. However there are some issues with that previous
implementation. Using Scrypt offers no real advantage to
Proof-Of-Stake; and is far slower than some alternatives. Since
BlackCoin is no longer in PoW phase, the only major change
would have to occur in the algorithm for determining the block
hash. Therefore the block hash has been changed back to
SHA256d. To reflect this the block version has been increased
to version 7.

PS: From my experience Blackhalo is using SHA256d so i speculate that scrypt have some limitations
to use multi sing technology. ( 2 factor authentication in clients - in Halo addresses have 2 dimensions )
or is just slower.

Topic: Are PoS coins secure and reliable? (Read 2072 times)