Pages:
Author

Topic: Is PoS the future of Bitcoin mining? - page 3. (Read 2721 times)

legendary
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
May 07, 2015, 10:05:22 AM
#25
I hear constantly about how miners would not agree to fork and introduce PoS. What miners? If we continue this road, in 2 years we ll have 4-5 big farms in the world mining 95% of BTC while the rest ll be cover while hobbyists who mine at a loss, simply for the sake of good old times.

We try to avoid centralization but without any serious improvement, we are heading towards it.

21
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1007
DMD Diamond Making Money 4+ years! Join us!
May 07, 2015, 10:01:59 AM
#24
I hear constantly about how miners would not agree to fork and introduce PoS. What miners? If we continue this road, in 2 years we ll have 4-5 big farms in the world mining 95% of BTC while the rest ll be cover while hobbyists who mine at a loss, simply for the sake of good old times.

We try to avoid centralization but without any serious improvement, we are heading towards it.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1016
May 07, 2015, 09:47:56 AM
#23
This is impossible.
Question, who paid the 3% a year?
The answer is nobody, it like something fall the sky, or a perpetual motion machine.

It seems like you dont understand what POS means , and it is not about someone paying you for the 3 % or anything. perhaps you want to read about POS coins again

People can't even agree to a simple fork to increase the blocksize to 20MB. Why would you think that forking Bitcoin to a Piece-of-Shit coin could stand any chance of happening?
This, we can't even get the community on board with a no brainer. If you think that you could get it passed go for it, the code is open source, make it work and try to get it to go. You might even get a few people who will jump over to BTC-POS but it would just be another alt coin.

Changing BTC to POS wont make it to be altcoin but I do agree that it will be a very useless thing to do .

Changing to PoS could solve some problems, like the problem of current miners crying for more fiat as income.

changing to POS wont help anyone because if BTC is change into POS then the value of it will drop too, leaving it meaningless to be just useless coins and not BTC anymore. Forking it in 20mb block will atleast make some decent effect to that
legendary
Activity: 994
Merit: 1035
hero member
Activity: 658
Merit: 501
May 07, 2015, 08:14:29 AM
#21
what about instead of pure pos, a hybrid like pow/pos? It is still not free from problems but, at least it won't take the whole mining activity out of the question


Yes, that is what I had in mind. Keeping PoW and adding PoS.

I like the idea of adding TaPoS as long as it doesn't interfere with bitcoins planned disinflation and PoW security model. You do no need consensus or a fork to make this happen either. Simply create a  TaPoS/PoS blockchain and add functionality to a bitcoin wallet where the distribution of the PoS tokens mirrors BTC distribution. These TaPoS tokens could be used as another security layer and to provide 1 second confirmations.

Within your wallet the the TaPoS tokens would be hidden and non trade able for usability and so this isn't a competing alt.

I.E... The user receives a payment and the wallet immediately starts confirming the transaction with TaPoS every second and than after approximately 10 minutes the regular PoW confirmation comes in with the wallet showing a distinction between types of confirmations. Thus in a decentralized manner you can get a higher degree of confidence that a cup of coffee you sold is secure but with more expensive items you could wait till 1-3 PoW confirmations came through ontop of the TaPoS confirmations.

Added benefit - This could be a nice warning that a 51% attack is occurring and allow the seller time to hold off on the transaction when the TaPoS confirmations are failing but the PoW confirmations are being approved.
donator
Activity: 1617
Merit: 1012
May 07, 2015, 06:44:07 AM
#20
People can't even agree to a simple fork to increase the blocksize to 20MB. Why would you think that forking Bitcoin to a Piece-of-Shit coin could stand any chance of happening?
legendary
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
May 07, 2015, 06:06:17 AM
#19
Thread #29801 trying to push alt coins with less security.
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
May 07, 2015, 05:52:52 AM
#18
Changing to PoS could solve some problems, like the problem of current miners crying for more fiat as income.
But, really, it's not gonna happen. Ever.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1010
May 07, 2015, 05:50:35 AM
#17
Bitcoin will never go PoS, not as a hybrid nor as a 100% PoS system.

Mining will last until 2140 anyway, so there is no need for PoS. Bitcoin is not a bank, so there should be no interest from PoS Smiley
full member
Activity: 350
Merit: 118
May 07, 2015, 04:58:29 AM
#16
Hey there guys,

I see a lot of people and BTC devs talk about the size of BTC blockchain as one of the main issues to be solved in the future. What about adding PoS to BTC so it becomes both PoW and PoS coin?

Since mining difficulty is going to go up more and more, only large miners with access to cheap electricity and a lot of capital will stay in the game.

With PoS, even small miners would be able to stay in the game and benefit from holding BTC. I agree, holding BTC does not help crypto adoption and does not bring new retailers but it might bring back profitability into the game which is one of the main reasons people would accept and invest into Bitcoin.

I m not talking about high PoS, something moderate 3% a year, max.

I ve personally invested into a lot of PoW and PoS coins, DMD Diamond is my favorite, and I would like to see BTC getting some shiny new traits as well. After all, in tech world, it is all about constant innovation.

Apparently transitioning a coin from PoW to PoS (or even partial PoS) is actually far from trivial. The Lottocoin dev attempted to do this but failed because the complexity of the task was too much for him to handle:

Lottocoin is almost mined out, should we change it to POS to keep the network moving?

I dont know how to convert the current code to POS while keeping the same blockchain, but We could make a New POS coin, and do
a 1 to 1 coin swap, and also get the exchanges on board to make the process easier.

Any coins not swapped after a certian time, like 6 months, can be distributed via a faucet or something.

If we were to change to POS, how much interest should it pay? 10% 20%..?

What do you guys wanna do?

Link to that thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/should-lottocoin-change-to-pos-1028981

what about instead of pure pos, a hybrid like pow/pos? It is still not free from problems but, at least it won't take the whole mining activity out of the question


Yes, that is what I had in mind. Keeping PoW and adding PoS.
The POS should have no interest, like NXT or qora, not the type of PPC's POS.

For those coins, stakers still get a reward. It's just that unlike Peercoin which has a fixed reward (fixed interest rate), NXT and Qora have the rewards come directly from transaction fees (variable interest rate).

What fixed rate PoS does it create inflation. Very high fixed rate PoS coins like HYPER have lots of inflation because the total coin supply keeps on going bigger and bigger. This erodes the value of the coin. It's far better to have a reward system like NXT or Qora since only then will the coin supply remain untampered with.
legendary
Activity: 3052
Merit: 1053
bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds
May 07, 2015, 04:55:12 AM
#15
i dont think thats a move that fit to bitcoin
there are altcoins to serve different needs of people

if there are people who want to invest in a coin and earn interest by just own coins
without any need of value increase created on marketplace

then POS coins are a good alternative investment

but alway carefull where to spend money in the next hype and soon dead altcoin

or into something already years on market which can prove price stability towards BTC and add 50% POS earnings on top

i full agree its not a solution for everyone there not even enought DMD existing to give everyone the ability to get enought for beeing able stake new coins

so its more like a alternative for open mindest people who split investments
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
May 07, 2015, 04:43:13 AM
#14
what about instead of pure pos, a hybrid like pow/pos? It is still not free from problems but, at least it won't take the whole mining activity out of the question


Yes, that is what I had in mind. Keeping PoW and adding PoS.
The POS should have no interest, like NXT or qora, not the type of PPC's POS.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1007
DMD Diamond Making Money 4+ years! Join us!
May 07, 2015, 04:39:42 AM
#13
what about instead of pure pos, a hybrid like pow/pos? It is still not free from problems but, at least it won't take the whole mining activity out of the question


Yes, that is what I had in mind. Keeping PoW and adding PoS.
full member
Activity: 132
Merit: 100
willmathforcrypto.com
May 07, 2015, 04:00:28 AM
#12
Bitcoin will never switch to PoS. This has already been discussed at length in many threads.

Fortunately, anyone who prefers PoS can choose from a number of altcoins. No one is compelled to use bitcoin.

I write this as someone who has no strong opinion on the pros and cons of PoW vs. PoS.
legendary
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1481
May 07, 2015, 02:55:40 AM
#11
More mining power at dirty cheap electricity rates it is like having big companies going to Africa or Asia to produce stuff at $50 that we buy at $500.
On the long term it might be the exact same problem.

We started with cpu mining where everyone could have tried to mine and support the network.
After that you know the story GPU mining, then FPGA, now ASIC and tomorrow what else?

Now most of us stepped out because if you don't have big money that's not sustainable.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
May 07, 2015, 02:50:32 AM
#10
I m not trying to solve the issue. These are two separate issues. I m trying to discuss a way how BTC can evolve in the future. I remember Charles Lee saying LTC does not need any gimmicks and it s fine as it is. IT IS NOT, look at the price now. These fancy gimmick attract people and increase profitability. IMO, BTC needs to bring in new stuff in the future, look at the banks and other money transmitters, they introduce new offers constantly. In order to remain profitable and interesting for new users, the product needs to improve and innovate, constantly.

We have not had anything new since day 1.

I do not want to see BTC becoming number 2, ever. Having largest acceptance s not going to work forever.
Actually it will. I'm not sure why you've said that.
If Bitcoin keeps the advantage that it has (in regards to acceptance) over the altcoins it will be priced much higher.
Switching to PoS is trying to kill the miner industry. I doubt that any big miner would accept such a fork.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
May 07, 2015, 02:26:45 AM
#9
Hey there guys,

I see a lot of people and BTC devs talk about the size of BTC blockchain as one of the main issues to be solved in the future. What about adding PoS to BTC?

Since mining difficulty is going to go up more and more, only large miners with access to cheap electricity and a lot of capital will stay in the game.

With PoS, even small miners would be able to stay in the game and benefit from holding BTC. I agree, holding BTC does not help crypto adoption and does not bring new retailers but it might bring back profitability into the game which is one of the main reasons people would accept and invest into Bitcoin.

I m not talking about high PoS, something moderate 3% a year, max.

I ve personally invested into a lot of PoW and PoS coins, DMD Diamond is my favorite, and I would like to see BTC getting some shiny new traits as well. After all, in tech world, it is all about constant innovation.

Yes, Satoshi predicted that.
We will reach a equilibrium stage where mining will be handled by those who will stay - or something a long those lines.
Go through his posts for the actual message.

Yeah, the question is: Who will be the ones that stay?
The Rockefeller?
Rothschilds?

Are we going to centralize Bitcoin?


Just because people have more mining power doesn't exclude anyone. It may just mean they find their bitcoins sooner than others. Bitcoin is all-inclusive, without that, it doesn't work. Then it's just another exclusive club, y'know, what all y'all hate, a centralized banking system. LOL. I'll leave that to you genius techies to figure out.
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
May 07, 2015, 01:57:19 AM
#8
what about instead of pure pos, a hybrid like pow/pos? It is still not free from problems but, at least it won't take the whole mining activity out of the question
member
Activity: 308
Merit: 10
May 07, 2015, 01:42:19 AM
#7
Hey there guys,

I see a lot of people and BTC devs talk about the size of BTC blockchain as one of the main issues to be solved in the future. What about adding PoS to BTC?

Since mining difficulty is going to go up more and more, only large miners with access to cheap electricity and a lot of capital will stay in the game.

With PoS, even small miners would be able to stay in the game and benefit from holding BTC. I agree, holding BTC does not help crypto adoption and does not bring new retailers but it might bring back profitability into the game which is one of the main reasons people would accept and invest into Bitcoin.

I m not talking about high PoS, something moderate 3% a year, max.

I ve personally invested into a lot of PoW and PoS coins, DMD Diamond is my favorite, and I would like to see BTC getting some shiny new traits as well. After all, in tech world, it is all about constant innovation.

Yes, Satoshi predicted that.
We will reach a equilibrium stage where mining will be handled by those who will stay - or something a long those lines.
Go through his posts for the actual message.

Yeah, the question is: Who will be the ones that stay?
The Rockefeller?
Rothschilds?

Are we going to centralize Bitcoin?
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
Bitcoin Samurai
May 07, 2015, 01:40:18 AM
#6
Hey there guys,

I see a lot of people and BTC devs talk about the size of BTC blockchain as one of the main issues to be solved in the future. What about adding PoS to BTC?

Since mining difficulty is going to go up more and more, only large miners with access to cheap electricity and a lot of capital will stay in the game.

With PoS, even small miners would be able to stay in the game and benefit from holding BTC. I agree, holding BTC does not help crypto adoption and does not bring new retailers but it might bring back profitability into the game which is one of the main reasons people would accept and invest into Bitcoin.

I m not talking about high PoS, something moderate 3% a year, max.

I ve personally invested into a lot of PoW and PoS coins, DMD Diamond is my favorite, and I would like to see BTC getting some shiny new traits as well. After all, in tech world, it is all about constant innovation.

Yes, Satoshi predicted that.
We will reach a equilibrium stage where mining will be handled by those who will stay - or something a long those lines.
Go through his posts for the actual message.
Pages:
Jump to: