PoW, with all it's unconveniences, is still the strongest one.
If you had to store your entire wealth in only one coin, I don't even need to ask because you would use Bitcoin and not NXT or whatever.
Why? because Bitcoin is behind the strongest computing network on the planet. Thats why NASDAQ and friends will be using the Bitcoin blockchain when they mean "blockchain technology".
Topic: Blockchain Morality Spectrum (Read 466 times)
It's time to disambiguate the term "Blockchain" and recognize the usage and meaning of the term. In a general sense it is a link connecting the historical timeline of cryptographic hashes. These hashes form blocks which are intended to contain transaction verifications of token exchanges. I will reference three two types of "Blockchains" and their moral relationship.
workchain--------stakechain
Workchains are based on Proof-of-Work for transaction verification purposes. In science, work is expressed in terms of expenditure of energy to achieve something measurable. It doesn't matter what the work is, only that it achieves something predictable based upon a given amount of energy. Given that the laws of physics are universal, participation can be accomplished without permission nearly anywhere with equivalent effect.
Stakechains are based on Proof-of Stake for transaction verification purposes. Stake is a sociological term for ownership of a percentage of a finite resource. Such ownership is usually mitigated by laws governing ownership and the power it bestows over time. Without such laws, ownership aggregates into power based on the necessity of that resource to the general population. Participation in this system requires asking the permission of stakeholders to give up some of their percentage.
Blockchains can exist anywhere on the spectrum. They may be entirely based on PoW from the distribution phase throughout its indefinite lifecycle. They may be distributed entirely by a central point and administered in any way that central authority wishes. They may scheme to find a balance in the spectrum that mitigates the permission requirement for participation with varying degrees of success.
From a moral perspective, excluding populations from an economy is apartheid. While Proof-of-Work systems can be entirely open and pseudonymous where anyone can jump in at anytime to participate in the blockchain security, Proof-of-Stake can be co-opted by agents of authority to deny access to the system for any undesirable populations. To get around this moral hazard, most Proof-of-Stake systems use Proof-of-Work systems to make their system available, at least while it pleases the stakeholders or it destroys the PoW system, whichever comes first. At that point, the PoS system no longer has a moral excuse for their aggregation of power. At that point, the only recourse is to use political power to mitigate the PoS system and restore equal access to the financial system. This is an undesirable consequence that would best be avoided by simply limiting stakechain technology to political authorities in the first place.
workchain--------stakechain
Workchains are based on Proof-of-Work for transaction verification purposes. In science, work is expressed in terms of expenditure of energy to achieve something measurable. It doesn't matter what the work is, only that it achieves something predictable based upon a given amount of energy. Given that the laws of physics are universal, participation can be accomplished without permission nearly anywhere with equivalent effect.
Stakechains are based on Proof-of Stake for transaction verification purposes. Stake is a sociological term for ownership of a percentage of a finite resource. Such ownership is usually mitigated by laws governing ownership and the power it bestows over time. Without such laws, ownership aggregates into power based on the necessity of that resource to the general population. Participation in this system requires asking the permission of stakeholders to give up some of their percentage.
Blockchains can exist anywhere on the spectrum. They may be entirely based on PoW from the distribution phase throughout its indefinite lifecycle. They may be distributed entirely by a central point and administered in any way that central authority wishes. They may scheme to find a balance in the spectrum that mitigates the permission requirement for participation with varying degrees of success.
From a moral perspective, excluding populations from an economy is apartheid. While Proof-of-Work systems can be entirely open and pseudonymous where anyone can jump in at anytime to participate in the blockchain security, Proof-of-Stake can be co-opted by agents of authority to deny access to the system for any undesirable populations. To get around this moral hazard, most Proof-of-Stake systems use Proof-of-Work systems to make their system available, at least while it pleases the stakeholders or it destroys the PoW system, whichever comes first. At that point, the PoS system no longer has a moral excuse for their aggregation of power. At that point, the only recourse is to use political power to mitigate the PoS system and restore equal access to the financial system. This is an undesirable consequence that would best be avoided by simply limiting stakechain technology to political authorities in the first place.
Jump to: