Topic: Do you think Bitcoin should modify to POW + POS ? █████ Poll █████ - page 10. (Read 7564 times)
January 05, 2015, 01:46:23 PM
please add an option for pos only, pos + pow together is pointless, a token amount of interest is not an incentive to hold coins while mining is still creating 10% or whatever annual inflation
January 05, 2015, 01:43:59 PM
Interesting.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
January 05, 2015, 01:42:55 PM
Security and environmentalism.
no, I am not overly concerned with environmentalism, and don't believe there is much threat from consuming electricity.
January 05, 2015, 01:40:03 PM
Security and environmentalism.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
January 05, 2015, 01:39:16 PM
POW is fine. The energy required to maintain the Bitcoin network is fairly trivial and energy is a competed market. If Bitcoin disappeared, electricity producers would compensate for any decrease in demand by lowering prices to a level that spurs people to keep their lights on a bit longer.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
Agreed. the benefit to introducing any POS element would be security, not environmentalism.
So you would be happy if you could have both?
both what?
January 05, 2015, 01:37:56 PM
POW is fine. The energy required to maintain the Bitcoin network is fairly trivial and energy is a competed market. If Bitcoin disappeared, electricity producers would compensate for any decrease in demand by lowering prices to a level that spurs people to keep their lights on a bit longer.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
Agreed. the benefit to introducing any POS element would be security, not environmentalism.
So you would be happy if you could have both?
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
January 05, 2015, 01:24:20 PM
POW is fine. The energy required to maintain the Bitcoin network is fairly trivial and energy is a competed market. If Bitcoin disappeared, electricity producers would compensate for any decrease in demand by lowering prices to a level that spurs people to keep their lights on a bit longer.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
Agreed. the benefit to introducing any POS element would be security, not environmentalism.
January 05, 2015, 01:02:32 PM
POW is fine. The energy required to maintain the Bitcoin network is fairly trivial and energy is a competed market. If Bitcoin disappeared, electricity producers would compensate for any decrease in demand by lowering prices to a level that spurs people to keep their lights on a bit longer.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
There would be no net benefit to the environment if Bitcoin disappeared tomorrow. It might actually harm the environment since more people would use bank notes produced from felled trees rather than electricity produced from Nuclear sources.
January 05, 2015, 12:49:52 PM
By protecting the system from enemy outside PoS coins give too much freedom to enemy within.
PoW allows those two enemies fight each other on the open stage, thus balance between freedom and security is achieved. PoW+PoS is a slippery slope, as people are easily tricked into selling one for another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1xXYeNrW9k
PoW allows those two enemies fight each other on the open stage, thus balance between freedom and security is achieved. PoW+PoS is a slippery slope, as people are easily tricked into selling one for another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1xXYeNrW9k
January 05, 2015, 12:39:27 PM
The poll should be conducted by only allowing Bitcoin stakeholders to vote, and weighted by the amount of their Bitcoin holding.
Let's do it, Bitminter has about 2K in their pool wallet, as does DiscusFish... all Satoshi's coins were mined not bought so that's another million on our side...
January 05, 2015, 12:11:42 PM
This poll is flawed anyway, since all the PoW miners would come and vote NO.
The poll should be conducted by only allowing Bitcoin stakeholders to vote, and weighted by the amount of their Bitcoin holding.
The poll should be conducted by only allowing Bitcoin stakeholders to vote, and weighted by the amount of their Bitcoin holding.
January 05, 2015, 12:11:00 PM
if there was a proposal out here that security experts agreed was viable, sure. But so far there isn't one.
lol
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
January 05, 2015, 12:09:44 PM
if there was a proposal out here that security experts agreed was viable, sure. But so far there isn't one.
January 05, 2015, 12:04:44 PM
Definite YES.
You don't let some miner from China control your personal finance, why let miners control your Bitcoin network? Bitcoin stakeholders should be the controller of Bitcoin network, not some random profit crazy mining farm from China. The PoW miner's only intention and purpose is to extract value out of Bitcoin eco-system.
You don't let some miner from China control your personal finance, why let miners control your Bitcoin network? Bitcoin stakeholders should be the controller of Bitcoin network, not some random profit crazy mining farm from China. The PoW miner's only intention and purpose is to extract value out of Bitcoin eco-system.
Those damn Chinese! All they know how to do is make everything Walmart sells and mine Bitcoin. We should develop a virus that attacks fried rice and egg rolls. lol
January 05, 2015, 12:02:52 PM
But that's one of the problems with PoS, it promotes hoarding and kills activity. Less activity leads to less adoption which leads to price decline.
Marketcap isn't everything, it's merely a snapshot of how much people are willing to pay for a coin and can change rather quickly.
It's too early to judge that PoS kills activity. Quite the opposite: In Nxt, numbers of transactions per day steadily increased since July until today (around 3k per day now, which is not a lot compared to bitcoin, but still).
I agree it's too early to make a judgement based on comparing any 2 coins. But you don't need empirical data to discuss differences between PoS/PoW designs. You only need common sense for that.
NXT is probably not the best example in this case. Since it's non-inflationary, the only income you get is your share in tx fees (afaik), which atm are very insignificant. Therefore from the average holder's point of view - it's probably better to use it and keep it alive.
Now what would happen if we switch BTC to PoS (with the same issuance model)? You think it would increase activity? You have @micky123 above saying he would stop investing. I know I wouldn't be keen on buying a coffee with my PoS coins and wouldn't touch my stash to tip or donate.
If your coins generate you more coins - you don't want to spend them. Simple.
Right now you have bitcoin hoarders, who (despite all the logic) wouldn't use their coins at all. If they're further incentivised to hoard - why would they change their approach?
Stop spreading your false logic. USD has 1% interest on savings accounts, does it stop anyone from spending USD?
Exactly. And Nxt forging gets you something like 0.5%. It is far better and more profitable to use your nxt to invest or to spend. The goal of nxt forging is to have hundreds of nxt based businesses, all forging blocks to secure the network and protect their business with their running balance, rather then to have people getting rich off forging. For a smaller forger, forging allows you to have quite a few free transactions on the network.
January 05, 2015, 11:59:36 AM
Stop spreading your retarded logic. USD has 1% interest on savings accounts, does it stop anyone from spending USD?
Sunshine, let's keep some manners here, OK?
1% interest is less than inflation, does it pay to hold?
Ever heard of negative interest rates? Why did they do that?
http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/negative-interest-rates
Are you now saying that deflation is good for economy?
Besides, USD is a legal tender, so people will be spending it even if they don't want to. You can't really compare it to un-established crypto-currency.
Are you saying deflation is not good for economy? How is this relevant anyway? Proof of Stake can do both inflationary and deflationary, you can take your pick. For example, with Bitcoin, the PoS system can be implemented as deflationary, since Bitcoin is deflationary.
January 05, 2015, 11:57:32 AM
Stop spreading your retarded logic. USD has 1% interest on savings accounts, does it stop anyone from spending USD?
Sunshine, let's keep some manners here, OK?
1% interest is less than inflation, does it pay to hold?
Ever heard of negative interest rates? Why did they do that?
http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/negative-interest-rates
Are you now saying that deflation is good for economy?
Besides, USD is a legal tender, so people will be spending it even if they don't want to. You can't really compare it to un-established crypto-currency.
January 05, 2015, 11:56:34 AM
I should go ahead and spend more money to buy a electricity wasting, heat+noise generating machine. Then waste more electricity.
Right, and the government pays your transportation costs to go and do physical banking, and buys you new pants when you wear the pockets out with change.
Everything worth doing costs something, get over it.
Sure, everything worth doing cost something, I could agree to that. But there is EXPENSIVE and CHEAP costs, yes?
You are insisting doing thing the expensive way, like building a railroad with shovels, while more advanced machinery is available to do it much more cheaply.
Not only you are choosing the expensive way PoW, it's also less secure and you let potentially non-stakeholding profit crazy miners control the Bitcoin network.
January 05, 2015, 11:55:58 AM
oh no not this subject again.
what a sad attempt to promote those shitty pos coins.
what a sad attempt to promote those shitty pos coins.
January 05, 2015, 11:51:59 AM
I should go ahead and spend more money to buy a electricity wasting, heat+noise generating machine. Then waste more electricity.
Right, and the government pays your transportation costs to go and do physical banking, and buys you new pants when you wear the pockets out with change.
Everything worth doing costs something, get over it.
Jump to: