I think the POW mechanism is more secure because even though the POS mechanism does not consume energy.
However, the POS mechanism may face a situation where most tokens are concentrated in the hands of a few people.
Topic: Is PoS safer over PoW? (Read 193 times)
I can easily imagine a huge debate will develop over this topic.
Essentially both can be 51% attacked with.... having enough money and desire to own 51% of the resources needed to crack the system. It doesn't matter if you will buy hardware equipment (PoW) or just buy coins (PoS).
Essentially both can be 51% attacked with.... having enough money and desire to own 51% of the resources needed to crack the system. It doesn't matter if you will buy hardware equipment (PoW) or just buy coins (PoS).
I don't think there should be any difference in security issues between Proof of Stake and Proof of Work you are using an encrypted algorithm for both. Proof of stake is far less power hungry as you only need to run 1 machine virtual or actual per node I am involved in 2 proof of stake coins at the moment.
i don't think we can prefer one over the other. both are good algorithms and both have pros and cons of themselves. there simply isn't some perfect magical algorithm that you can use.
for example PoS in my opinion has a bad design when it comes to distribution which is totally unfair. and i am not alone in this. and that is not all the algorithms out there. there is a lot more. in fact someone recently made a list of all of them here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/list-consensus-algorithms-4776600
for example PoS in my opinion has a bad design when it comes to distribution which is totally unfair. and i am not alone in this. and that is not all the algorithms out there. there is a lot more. in fact someone recently made a list of all of them here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/list-consensus-algorithms-4776600
The bitcoin although does not cover the majority of the market it covers nearly 40 percent of the market so imagine that overnight 40 percent of the market value f the cryptocurrency market dis appease the trust of the people cryptocurrency will be destroyed and money retraction will occur
Soon Ethereum testament hard change to PoS, and I can't wait to card what happens. pow right applications means very frequently thrilling.
I think the security is pretty much the same.
Both POW and POS have their advantages, so long as it is a token of the underlying technology of the blockchain, it is worth investing, because no one knows that there will be a big increase in the future generation.
Both POW and POS have their advantages, so long as it is a token of the underlying technology of the blockchain, it is worth investing, because no one knows that there will be a big increase in the future generation.
Video sharing is the process of uploading, publishing, and sharing video clips online.
There are many video sharing websites/platforms out there such as YouTube, Vimeo, Dailymotion, and Verasity. continue
There are many video sharing websites/platforms out there such as YouTube, Vimeo, Dailymotion, and Verasity. continue
Yes, the Proof-of-stake eliminates some of the major security issues associated with the Proof-of-work scheme. The most obvious of them is the 51% attack. If an attacker was to hack a cryptocurrency network today, for instance, the Bitcoin network, he would have to gain 51% of the computing power. This can be made possible if some of the largest mining pools join together to attack the network. While this is highly unlikely politically, technically, it is still a possibility.
Team up to commit economic suicide 
Yes, the Proof-of-stake eliminates some of the major security issues associated with the Proof-of-work scheme. The most obvious of them is the 51% attack. If an attacker was to hack a cryptocurrency network today, for instance, the Bitcoin network, he would have to gain 51% of the computing power. This can be made possible if some of the largest mining pools join together to attack the network. While this is highly unlikely politically, technically, it is still a possibility.
PoS is not safer
there are ways to play around with the "validator pool" so that on person with 20 addresses (if the pool requires minimum 20 validators) could slf 'mine' blocks forever
PoS is cheaper to mine.. again making it easier to attack
PoS is more energy efficient as it doesnt require special equipment. but with that said instead of buying millions of $$ of equipment you can spend a smaller amount on staking a validator pool you game the PoS system
there are ways to play around with the "validator pool" so that on person with 20 addresses (if the pool requires minimum 20 validators) could slf 'mine' blocks forever
PoS is cheaper to mine.. again making it easier to attack
PoS is more energy efficient as it doesnt require special equipment. but with that said instead of buying millions of $$ of equipment you can spend a smaller amount on staking a validator pool you game the PoS system
This is why PoW critics are incredibly wrong when they say, "Proof of Work is so wasteful, they are polluting a lot for no purpose".
What's so difficult to understand about the fact that all that energy generated in the mines is to secure the network?
Without all that "waste of energy" it wouldn't be possible to claim that Bitcoin is the safest crypto in the game. You either have it or you don't.
Both algorithms are not ideal, but the best is something average. Like Dash.
Not sure about security, there are problems for both of them. But also PoS can be for many more convenient and it should be considered.
I would have to say that POS is much safer for the coin itself, as it forces people to own the coin that they want to compromise if they want to do that. This makes no sense though, because if they want to compromise the coin they're going to be compromising their own asset-- meaning that they're going to lose money if they do this. People who own mining rigs won't have the same issue, as they will simply be able to mine another coin and live on with compromising with PoW
Check out this for an in-depth comparing of the two (https://decentralize.today/why-pos-is-better-than-pow-2dc3cd9881a7?gi=7c9f061772cc)
Check out this for an in-depth comparing of the two (https://decentralize.today/why-pos-is-better-than-pow-2dc3cd9881a7?gi=7c9f061772cc)
I agree with you here, "POS is safer for the coin itself"
so if all the coins moves to POS, then it means to mine i have to own the maximum stakes of the coin i want to mine, right?
I think the security is pretty much the same.
Both POW and POS have their advantages, so long as it is a token of the underlying technology of the blockchain, it is worth investing, because no one knows that there will be a big increase in the future generation.
Both POW and POS have their advantages, so long as it is a token of the underlying technology of the blockchain, it is worth investing, because no one knows that there will be a big increase in the future generation.
I don't think this because of increased safety. But more like environmental concern. PoW is a huge energy waste, miners don't do anything useful rather than protecting blockchain from the attack. So much computational power doesn't do anything good to the humanity.
Safer for the time being. But even then I doubt that it will be safer most likely to change the work of the platform related to saving energy resources.
The market value proves that the electronic currency has chosen POW. Most of the top POW coins in circulation are market capitalization, and Bitcoin alone holds a market value of more than 80%. The market value of POW coins, such as Litecoin, dog coins, and dark coins, is also higher, and dot currency is POW plus POS. However, the POS model's bit stocks, future coins and so on have not been ranked higher in market value. The market value is also much smaller than the POW currency. Reebok and Stellar are either POS or POW, but adopt a consensus mechanism that they do not have a blockchain. It is also impossible to create a blockchain with POW or POS. The value of electronic currency is not generated by POW or POS. The purpose of POW and POS is just to ensure blockchain security. E-coin value = powder loyalty * user volume * The source of the value of the application volume is not related to the process itself.
Soon Ethereum will hard fork to PoS, and I can't wait to see what happens.
I predict a an internal civil wark in which there is a split and we will have ETH-PoW and ETH-PoS. Most people will stick to ETH-PoS because that is what the dear leader Vitalik Buterin will support, but still, will be a big clusterfuck for Ethereum.
I can't also wait to see what happens when they move to PoS in a system where 80% of the initial supply was distributed to basically the developers. Ethereum is such a shitcoin, unbelievable it went this high in price.
Ethereum is going to shift from PoW to PoS, obviously its hurting the miners community also, raising questions over the security, developers are worried about the security of PoS, PoS have advantage over PoW in terms of energy, but is going to be secure as much as PoW?
Yes PoS is less cost energy if you compare with PoW. Do you know when ethereum will shift to PoS ?
if this is really happened, maybe the price of ethereum will rise. Because everyone need to owning ethereum to mining in PoS.
Jump to: