Topic: Is PoS dead? - page 4. (Read 17352 times)

Not to mention retarded posts to sift through.

All of these PoS coins are heavily centralized...
Also, we have not yet seen a well financed, well executed exploit of a major PoS coin...
Just trivial exchange hacks on hot wallets or passwords.

When a guy like Peter Todd says PoS = "Proof of Shit"...
He is speaking as a foremost expert on the subject...
Notice Todd joined VIA which is a scrypt PoW coin.

The only possible rebuttal is that PoS is "good enough"...
And that the world runs on stuff that is imperfect and "good enough".

It's like we have regressed 200 years...
And people hope their bank is "good enough"...
To withstand a bank robbery by a bunch of retarded outlaws on horses...
Only now we have retarded sociopaths with botnets... what progress.

That Bitcoin has bumped against 51% three times is a cause for concern, not celebration. It means the currency survived because the pool chose to do the right thing. It means people using Bitcoin have to trust the pool will continue to do the right thing in future. That kind of trust ought to be anathema to crypto-currency fans.

That the first three times passed without incident does not mean the fourth will. I don't mean the pools will suddenly go crazy and kill Bitcoin. I do think they will act in their own interests. The time to worry will be when the block-reward halves, or halves again, and the miners start worrying about the return they need for the investments they've made. Then we'll start to see Bitcoin fees rising. A pool with 51% has a lot of negotiating power in that scenario. They don't have to reject blocks that accept low fees. The mere knowledge that they could, will influence the other miners.

Not really. I don't know other coins, but the revenue in Nxt from holding coins is already very low, and will be lower in future. It's not a reason not to spend your coins on something you need.

(Just to be clear, the stake used in forging isn't locked up at all. If you have 1000 NXT and are forging with it, you can spend 10 NXT any time you want, and then you'll be forging with 990 NXT. The revenue from forging will be about 0.3 NXT/year.)

Good to hear that he is on the dark side of the force.

PoS is the way to move forwards, its PoS which is dead. There are many variants of PoS now - TF, POI, DPOS etc.

BitShares is also proof of stake and currently #3

Ethereum is hybrid last I heard, though Vitalik wants to go to DPOS.

I see Dogecoin surviving as well. But it will probably switch to PoW/PoS model. Maybe even pure PoS. There are also chances it will attract all miners from Litecoin and become the Bitcoin of Scrypt. It will survive because it will be a tipping currency of choice and will find more ways into the gaming world, especially with younger generation who are/will be the main users and who make a very large share of the Internet users market. The inflation rate of Doge is a non-issue, starting from 2015 it will be smaller than that of Bitcoin or Litecoin until 2020. By 2020 a lot of things will have happened, there will be other survivors by then.

I think in a year or two from now Bitcoin will still be number #1 but that these and/or other PoS will take up the 2-10 spots according to market cap.

To me, the only PoW I see surviving in two years is bitcoin.  

While I think Bitcoin is very awesome, I also think it is flawed.  These others are just far more advanced in tech. 

I am not sure if those advances are going to be enough in the short term to overcome Bitcoins very large first mover advantage.  Ultimately it is the breadth of a network that makes a coin valuable not necessarily its tech.  In that aspect for now Bitcoin is king.

PPC peercoin is POS very old and still being bought and traded.

Nxt, Maidsafe, Ethereum, Stellar and NEM are all PoS.

The combined market cap of them is still rather large and have room to grow further. So, PoS is very much alive.

Considering bitshares-x is up 100%, I'd say, "not yet", at least for the delegated variety.

By the way, although I am very hard on Bitcoin and Litecoin, I still think they have a lot of life left in them. I compare their inevitable extinction to the extinction that gasoline is certain to face at some point... It will take a while, but it is certain to happen. All three have too many issues.

That being said.. if you are investing and looking for profit, I believe there's still a lot of profit to be had investing in Bitcoin.. I have been recommending it most to friends and family. I consider everything else as high risk investments. Litecoin might even have some profit in it to ride the wave another few times, but I am certain it will die much sooner than Bitcoin due to the network effect not being as strong.

Jeez.. Did I just start another debate?  

Let's not please, I've been typing all of this on my iPad and my fingers hurt. The stupid spell checker is really annoying me to when it comes to correcting crypto currency terms.

did u succeed to convert these fellas to the church of bitcoin or did they drop interest when realized fiat can do the same but without the energy waste of the proof of work ?

~CfA~

nvr play poker.

yeah, i think like most arguments in Bitcoin, it comes down to one's outlook on life.  i've learned to be an optimist, altho hopefully not blind-fully so.  perhaps i've been listening to too much Andreesen.

btw, have you noticed? it's Rally Time.

Never heard of him. I think you sound like someone I know of though, do you by chance keep getting banned from a poker forum?  

If so- I'll just leave that there, no need to elaborate.

Anyways, let's agree to disagree on the last remaining difference... the ability of the government to 51% attack Bitcoin. To make it clear, I also think it is unlikely to happen, but I do feel like they have the ability if they chose to do so.

hey mr bitcoin cool story brutha!  ONLY POW CAN DO THIS!

those ppl 4 sure thought u are a nifty genious.

~CfA~

CH,

are you Jonathan Levin by any chance?

unfortunately i used the wrong term to describe a 51% attack, ie, hack.  we have been talking about the same thing despite my carelessness in terms.  you can infer that from the context of my post.

i still disagree with the likelihood of a 51% attack.  the game theory doesn't match up with it, imo.  there are too many varied interests within gvt (is that better?). it won't act like a monolith.  politicians are now accepting BTC.  Wall St interests have gotten involved.  we have billionaires Branson & Ka Shing. the political blowback would be tremendous.  i think the benefits of working with Bitcoin will be seen.

just b/c something is possible doesn't mean it will or is likely to happen.  the earth can spin off it's axis and plunge into the sun, you know.  it would be interesting to see if it's still possible at this point to route enough electrical power and water flow into a single geographic region to run a big enough secret datacenter dedicated to malicious mining. 

as to gvt competence, does this sound like the great NSA you've ascribed such legendary powers to?:

http://www.govtech.com/federal/New-NSA-Data-Center-Too-Big-Not-to-Explode.html

How convenient.


I brought up that "personal shit" because it was applicable to the conversation. I know a lot more about Bitcoin than you would like to admit. My arguments are valid, it is not my fault your ignorance doesn't allow you to see that.

Actually I think it's less likely that Bitcoin would be hacked, than it is that it could be attacked from a known weakness such as a 51% attack. Just as it is more likely PoS is attacked by someone gaining 51% of the money supply than the protocol "get hacked."

I agree it is highly unlikely, just as it is unlikely someone will be able to successfully attack a PoS coin. This is the problem, with all your huffing and puffing, you can't admit this is unlikely to happen as well.

You are combining two different arguments, the ability for hackers to steal coins in hot wallets and being ignorant in that you don't think a large government has the ability to kill Bitcoin.

6 to 7 Billion huh? You obviously don't understand Bitcoin (mocking your hubris.) To guesstimate 100% of Bitcoin's market capitalization is sitting in hot wallets is a laughable statement.

Furthermore, I don't think you understand what an attacker could or couldn't do in the case of a 51% attack. You obviously don't understand Bitcoin (again mocking your hubris.) The incentive for a government or entity with deep pockets to kill Bitcoin would not to be to steal all the coins, they couldn't if they tried... even with 51% of the processing power. They could however perform a double spend attack and ruin the confidence in Bitcoin immediately causing the value to crash to pennies, among other various attacks.

The incentive is not to get rich by stealing Bitcoins, nor would that be the incentive for someone to attack a PoS coin in and of itself. The value of each will be ruined if either are successfully attacked, so getting rich by stealing the coins that are "begging to be stolen" would not be the incentive. The incentive for a government would be to stop possible money laundering, tax evasion, terrorist use, drug war reasons, kiddie porn, and secure their power of the money supply The FIAT system provides them with. The incentive for banksters should be obvious. Bitcoin et al is a disruptive technology, very well could replace them, kill their profits, and thus kill their lifestyle and well being of their families.

Those sound like possibilities to me, and again 1 billion dollars (hell double that, 2 Billion) is a drop in the bucket to them if they were to decide Bitcoin is a threat to the incentives described above. The only reason why they haven't yet is not because they can't, it is because they have do not think Bitcoin is a threat at this point in time or because they have decided they will be able to profit off of it much like the current system. If they do decide the former then Bitcoin, or any crypto currency, would be in grave danger. To deny otherwise at this point in time is foolish. I am not a big government guy or a capitalist as you would like to think (or have others believe,) but I am a realist and this is a real threat that crypto currencies face.


First of all, do you really think the use of the word 'gubmint' lends any credibility to your statements?  

They are not trying to block Bitcoin, they just want their cut. That is typical government and I don't see how it is any different from anything else that involves money. However, if they do determine Bitcoin is a threat in one way or another, then they will not hesitate to kill it. They will not do so by playing nice and making regulations to get their cut. They will straight up kill it under the guise of national security or some bullshit reason.


You contradict yourself with your last two quotes. In the first one the 'gubmints' are trying to block Bitcoin, but in this quote they are trying to embrace it and profit from it. You can't argue both for both sides, get off the fence. Earlier you were claiming they can't attack Bitcoin (which I disagree with), and now you are claiming that they don't want to attack Bitcoin (which I agree with... but that can change due to shifting dynamics.)

I do believe that a government or banksters could decide that Bitcoin is a threat due to the above described incentives to attack the network. Right now is not that time, Bitcoin is a small fish in a big ocean at the moment. However, the dynamics can change, opinions can change, politicians get voted in and out of office, and CEOs etcetera get replaced. They may not want to kill Bitcoin now, but if money laundering, tax evasion, terrorist adoption of cryptos, drug markets, losing their power with FIAT, and kiddy porn become a much bigger problem, then I think they will not hesitate to kill Bitcoin. In the bankster's case, when Bitcoin start affecting their bottom line too much they could choose to do the same.

There are something like 73 countries that have the money to kill Bitcoin if the number $1 billion for a successful 51% attack is somewhat accurate. You could double that number and there would be more or less the same amount of countries that have the ability to. It is again not a question of IF it can be done, but a question of if they want to or not.

Are the proof of stake coins still connecting to their networks?

Yes?

Then they're not dead.

i can't and won't talk about that b/c there are legal issues involved.

no, you bring that personal shit up b/c you still don't understand Bitcoin and you're using all sorts of BS arguments to defend your position as flawed as it may be.  everyone knows it's possible POW might be hacked.  but it's like talking about the possibility of a key collision.  it's highly unlikely at this point.  you continue to ignore the fact that $6-7 billion and at times more has just been sitting their on the blockchain begging to be stolen.  why hasn't it happened?  you say "they don't want to".  that's ridiculous.  sure they do. look at all the stumbling over themselves the gubmint has done to try and block Bitcoin.  look at the Bitlicense proposals.  no, gubmints like to do the easy things, like regulate or print money.  they don't like to work.  hmmm, funny, just like POS ppl. 

and just which gubmint will do the attack?  the US?  what about China or Russia?  maybe they're building secret mines themselves so as to overthrow the USD and protect Bitcoin.  you don't know.  gubmints won't collude to destroy Bitcoin; there's too much opportunity for them to use it themselves for financial gain.