Topic: [Megathread] The long-known PoW vs. PoS debate - page 6. (Read 3828 times)

It appears to me you just quoted some out-of-the air claims from Algorand again and presented already disproven arguments from earlier in the thread, such as 'argumentum ad autoritatem' (Turing award winner.....).

For instance, not forking is not a measure of security. Besides the fact that you never explained how they want to have a decentralized system but at the same time never have a fork. Not to mention that this was never the question. The question was never 'Is it more secure?' or 'How is Algorand more secure?', but it was: 'How do we solve these 2 essential problems we believe PoS to have?'.

No matter what amount of fancy stuff you build on top of PoS; if PoS is flawed, it's all meaningless. That's why I'd like you to stay focused on BlackHatCoiner's main questions and not overrun us with masses of quotes and arguments that don't answer the questions.

This was again not a reply to the question, but I'd like to point out that history has shown that producing and having more energy is always better than saving energy at every corner. Energy moves humanity forward and Bitcoin mining pushes the energy sector to produce more of it, especially renewable. I see this as a big win. But it still doesn't answer the questions, so I'd really like answers about these (full explanation on page 1 / follow the quote):

It not that the information is not in the google search engine, it is your cult mentality refused to acknowledge reality.
But in your next post, you will just cry fud.

https://algorand.foundation/algorand-protocol/about-algorand-protocol

Did I say, they are doing it in the US right now , no I did not.
What I said was they could if they wanted too, and it would be easy.
US Government has to ban btc mining 1st, that is less than 2 or 3 years away.
https://www.ictsd.org/how-do-power-companies-disconnect-service-with-digital-meters/

1st states ban btc mining and eventually the Country
https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2022/06/03/new-york-clamps-down-on-bitcoin-mining-in-newly-passed-bill/?sh=7ae439c76de5
And why will the bans increase
https://www.wsj.com/articles/electricity-shortage-warnings-grow-across-u-s-11652002380
Because energy is not in abundance any more thanks to climate issues , war , and sanctions.
https://www.npr.org/2021/10/01/1042209223/why-covid-is-affecting-chinas-power-rations
https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/uk-news/956911/what-is-power-rationing-uk-electricity
https://www.ft.com/content/13b06f9a-20cc-4499-9137-6299c0b81643

The failure by the btc cult to recognize that the energy abundance of the past few decades is changing ,
so that for most countries holding 1st world status will be unattainable.
In short, governments are most likely not going to be able to keep the lights on 24x7,
much less have the capacity for an overly wasteful PoW mining using up resources that are in short supply.
So unless one of the BTC cultist can build a Dyson sphere, even the current energy % wasted by PoW mining will be unsustainable very soon.  

* The secondary danger of low energy resources, is economic.*
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/energy/2022/06/02/were-in-trouble-electric-rates-in-texas-have-surged-over-70-as-summer-kicks-in/
With the Price of energy increasing and the loss of free investment capital going away because of the baby boomers shifting to safer investments like cash/bonds/tbills for their retirement, a large % of miners might go bankrupt before the bans occur.
Most miners survive off investment of venture capitalists , not the actual mining itself.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-06-01/in-crypto-downturn-startups-are-still-getting-venture-capital-dollars

They copy-pasted Litecoin's source code, which was copy-pasted from Tenebrix' source code, which was copy-pasted from Bitcoin's source code...

The only interesting development in all of this was the MWEB (Mimblewimble Extenseion Block) protocol that recently activated on Litecoin.

If you're so rationally thinking; why don't you ever address any of the issues presented throughout this thread, such as most recently by tadamichi?
Instead you're only throwing around insults and argumenting for PoS through a list of different coins' market capitalizations.

I feel like these two core questions by BlackHatCoiner sill haven't been answered; if your third-generation PoS technologies or whatever you're trying to say are solving these issues, why can't you explain how they do it?

I would also argue that PoW doesn’t require many different coins, since Bitcoin already does what it’s supposed to do. And that the switching to PoS of many shitcoins is more an expression of each founder wanting more control/ profits over their networks. But ofc sheep listen to empty words and marketing lines, instead of looking what the tech actually does.

//Edit: + There needs to be many PoS coins since everyone wants their own hands in the honeypot to lure in newbies, who can’t separate the difference between bitcoin and shitcoins yet. And so PoS coins hold a competition by who can add more useless features, while not even providing the basics of what a decentralized and free monetary system should do. And beginners fall for it, because it sounds good on paper, but they don’t understand the consequences of each design yet.

Isn't if funny that they've just copied-pasted bitcoin's source code, changed few lines and call themselves developers?

While some DOGE contributor/developer prefer PoS over PoW, they know each of them have it's own pros and cons rather than bashing PoW. Few example,
https://github.com/dogecoin/dogecoin/issues/1952
https://github.com/dogecoin/dogecoin/issues/1924
https://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoindev/comments/sk78gp/why_rush_to_pos/
https://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoindev/comments/tyzioi/does_anyone_know_more_about_the_community_staking/


Not as easy as you think, considering Bitcoin network is still running today.

K so lets go over your thought process and start with the biggest aspiring shitcoin first.
In ethereum with PoS your staked coins literally get locked up, like 10 percent of all eth is locked up at the moment and the update isnt even here yet. Since EIP-1559 it burns coins for being used to get "deflationary", but yet the eth supply is higher now, than when the update was introduced. So you basically created a network that punishes you for using it, but incentivizes old holders to not move their coins. Every newcomer is already at a huge disadvantage with this. Then to stake you will need atleast 32 eth and most wont ever have this much, so they will need centralized staking pools like coinbase and so on. So youre basically throwing the concept of self custody out the window, what happened to decentralization? Every sheep nowadays just runs after some fake yields without using their head. Most ethereum nodes are already running on aws, so lets increase the troughput of the network even more in eth 2.0 to make it even more centralized.

Giving up self custody and decentralized nodes and punishing people for doing transactions sounds like a super sound concept, but they have jpgs, that arent even stored on the chain but on centralized websites that just have a smart contract on the chain(without the jpg on it), so it must be superior to bitcoin and worth it.

Yes, but they don't work properly in both theory and practice. However, the other does work properly and has never had any problems.

Just because everyone in a PoW lemming cult agrees running off a cliff, yelling we are secure and decentralized, is a good idea,  
forgive me if I ignore those that are incapable of rational thought.

None of the bitcoin nutjobs will believe that PoW is dead , even after the governments ban it and shut the miners down,
you guys are a cult, reality is not your strong suit.  
You ignore stuff like :
https://fortune.com/2021/11/17/china-bitcoin-mining-ban-crypto-holdouts-ether-solana-price/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-57260829
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/03/15/kazakhstan-crackdown-forces-106-more-crypto-mines-to-close/
https://cryptoslate.com/a-global-energy-crisis-could-directly-affect-bitcoin-miners/
https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/business-news-why-is-electricity-shortage-a-major-concern-for-crypto-mining/409575
https://coinpedia.org/opinion/geopolitical-strategist-and-author-peter-zeihanpeter-zeihan-thinks-bitcoin-is-dumpster-fire/

Bitcoin is the easiest coin to restrict , one call to the power utilities and a automated disconnect by smart meter and bitcoin is dead.
PoS networks can be run from a laptop with solar panels and a backup battery, with no help from power utilities.

At this point you are just putting your head in the sand and disagree with anything that anybody else is saying.

Funny thing is that nobody can restrict bitcoin but they can easily restrict PoS coins. All it takes is to call up the developer who also holds majority coin and demand censorship or they can seize their coins and kill the chain by owning majority state in Proof of Stake.

Exactly; it would be pointless and thus difficult to get miners to remove some hashpower from one blockchain and add it to a new, untested one. Whereas in PoS it's trivial to quickly spin up a new blockchain, since you need no miners. This is another point that makes PoW so strong and Bitcoin so valuable; that it's very very difficult to create a serious contender to an existing PoW coin and that a serious alternative can't just be created out of thin air.

This is the real reason there are so many PoS coins and so few PoW: not because it's actually better, but because it's trivial to create masses of PoS coins. You don't need backing by real hardware, real energy and real miners; just some code (that you can fork) and a single server running the software. It's trivial.

But if something's so easy and cheap (free) to make, it also drastically reduces its value.

That's a very good point; it reminds me that there actually already exist (and will continue to exist) PoW tokens on the Ethereum blockchain.
I just discovered there are for instance a 'POW NFT' [1] and a '0xBitcoin' [2] that do PoW on Ethereum; this PoW mining will continue even if (big if) Ethereum Foundation manages to move their project to PoS somehow.

[1] https://www.pownft.com/
[2] https://cointelegraph.com/press-releases/0xbitcoin-the-neutral-pow-token-on-the-ethereum-network

Also, creating new Proof of Work coins is not needed. We don't need new coins. We need new features on existing coins. So, I think using Merged Mining to bootstrap some new coin, and get it attached to Bitcoin, is way better than bootstraping that coin as some entirely separated chain.

If it is "dying", then why it is still there? I have bad news for you: if you have some Proof of Stake coin, then it is still possible to transform it into Proof of Work coin again, because it is always possible to mine something. For example, you can mine transactions, like this: 000000000fdf0c619cd8e0d512c7e2c0da5a5808e60f12f1e0d01522d2986a51. Or you can mine new block headers, and attach them as a commitment to your Proof of Stake coin. Then, it is possible to create "a coin in a coin", especially if something is Turing-complete (but also Turing-completeness makes it opened to some attacks, allows writing quines, and many other things beyond that; but fortunately, soft-forks can be used to disable some features, and make it safe to use again).

If you want for Proof of Work to die, presenting an alternative is not sufficient. You need something that will stop people from recreating Proof of Work again and again, in other case it will never die. Maybe a lot of people will mine on CPUs and GPUs, maybe the difficulty would drop, when Proof of Work will be censored, but it will still be present. Also, Proof of Work can be hidden by revealing that later, when it is too late to stop that. To stop Proof of Work, you would need to ban commitments, and to do that, you would need to ban message encryption. And reaching that level of censorship is hard.

So, if you want to prevent constant uprising of Proof of Work, then your alternative has to be strong enough, to convince people that they should not bootstrap Proof of Work again. And I never saw such alternative, because Proof of Stake is not resistant to introducing Proof of Work on top of it, by using unstoppable no-forks in some local group, or some kind of soft-forks globally.

As BlackHatCoiner pointed out, this is basically an 'argumentum ad auctoritate'.
I'd like to add (actually mentioned that earlier) that it's certainly not easy spinning up a new PoW project. You need to convince people to point their miners to your coin instead of mining a well-known, comparatively stable and easy to use (sell) cryptocurrency.

That's a totally wrong conclusion. When something is 'old', it can either be 'outdated and dying', or 'tried and tested'; it doesn't need to be the former.

Actually PoS was proposed 10 years ago, it was discussed on this forum and other places and dismissed as fundamentally flawed. You can work on and 'evolve' a flawed concept for as much as you want, but it won't change the fact that it's fundamentally flawed. No matter how many 'generation' numbers you slap on it.

Nope, we're just still waiting for good arguments why PoS may not be fundamentally flawed. If you're so knowledgeable about Xth generation PoS, why don't you explain how that solves the issues BlackHatCoiner brought up for discussion on page 1?

How are you so sure that this was their reason? What makes you so sure that they don't just switch to get full control over the project, to get richer without doing anything (except holding coins they already have)? Besides the fact that as I said, ETH are trying to do this for years without success. Are you aware of that?

And yet , you have not studied the PoS version 3 blockchains like cardano and algorand.

It like saying you learned English and know it is superior to French.  
But have not studied French.

My point above is, if PoW is so great where are all of the new coins using it.
Answer , their are no new coins using it, because it is a dying tech, kind of like a dying religion that was false to begin with.

PoS Tech is growing and evolving every day , what happens to a dying PoW tech is a non-issue for the rest of us.  
Which is why you have to bump your thread, as everyone already knows the conclusion of the discussion is the death of PoW.
Whether Bitcoin evolves to avoid the PoW death, that is up to the btc devs. But to be honest most of us no longer care what happens to btc.

@n0nce, the developers of ethereum and doge have realized PoW is a dead end,
shame you have not caught up to their thought processes yet.
Next is where you claim you are smarter than the devs that are switching.  

You two have a great weekend, regaling how great BTC PoW is and why it will rule the universe.  

Besides n0nce's response, which will be ignored as you only talk about things that are in your interest, why the hell should I care what the others do? I don't use a PoW coin because it's in the #1 position, I couldn't care less about market caps; they're meaningless and misleading.

I've studied bitcoin, I've talked about it a lot, I've understood what's properly working and what's not, what are the advantages of PoW and what are the fundamental problems of every other mechanism that's been proposed (useful link!). But, what I'm sure I've comprehended years now, is that whataboutism can't form a strong argument. And that's what you do. You care what the market cap says. You've yet failed to show us how's PoS superior. You're constantly trying to prove us wrong, but you haven't yet found some time to question the first page.

To sum up, you believe in "argumentum ab auctoritate"[1], you think that using block explorers is better than running a node[2] (which kinda justifies why you don't care about censorship-resistance either), you're sure the governments will take care of PoW[3], you disapprove of having a free choice in energy usage[4] and you're obnoxiously trying to seem smart-ass with whataboutism? Dude, be serious.

[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.59363275
[2] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.59465990
[3] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.59567418
[4] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.59354295

Besides the fact that the list changed a good bit from a few months ago, I notice another pattern that is common to newcomers: you just take people's word at face value. If you've sticked around long enough (or cared to look up its history), you'd know that Ethereum is switching to PoS should be considered a meme by now; it was proposed probably 10 years ago if I remember correctly, and always pushed back. There's no reason it should get done in 2022; people even locked up Ether coins in December 2020 - a desperate move by the developers to get everyone onboard with the switch, but no, one and a half years have already passed and GPUs are still churning along.

Actually your point about the strength of PoS is pretty weak since out of 12 coins, Bitcoin, Ethereum and Dogecoin are still PoW, so 25% (you can't treat them as if they were PoS just because they say so - you're very naive believing these people blindly), 5 coins are actually tokens, then there's Ripple, which leaves you with only 3 PoS coins in the top 12. Cardano, Solana and Polkadot. Wasn't there something about the majority of coins switching to PoS or something like this? 3 out of 12 is not a majority, right.

By the way; it should be easy to understand that new projects are super incentivized to make PoS coins:
1) Keeps control in the hands of the creators as long as they don't sell the majority of coins
2) Keeps making them richer forever, without the need to buy, run, maintain and replace ASIC facilities from time to time
3) It's much, much easier to do. Who do you think would start mining a new random unknown altcoin and expend energy and resources on it if they could mine Bitcoin, Ethereum or Monero instead?
Neither of these points makes PoS inherently better in terms of censorship resistance, decentralization or security from attacks.

Notice that there are no new PoW coins in the top 12, once bitcoin ends or evolves that is the final nail in the coffin of the PoW dead end tech.

What about the PoS coins that have crashed, though? Isn't Bitcoin the only coin that has stayed on place #1 (since you care about this coinmarketcap metric so much), for 14 years, without budge? This is a point for Bitcoin, not against PoW.

It's pretty logical to analyze that Bitcoin is the best cryptocurrency, since it has the best and longest track record, the best decentralization, the best censorship resistance and the best security due to enormous amounts of energy spread around the world, used to secure it. It's not hard to understand. It also has the highest value since it's most widely accepted as a payment method compared to any other crypto - the whole value proposition of this space.

That's why I emphasize sticking around so much: after a few years, you'll have seen so many 'promising projects' come and go, get hyped and crash to zero, which means time does prove us right, and has consistently shown that Bitcoin is pretty much the only project still kicking.

Are you honestly this naive to think governments would ban Bitcoin because they care about the environment so much? If that's the case, you're way too blue-eyed, I'm sorry. It's all about control, power and money (because money leads to the former).

Bump
Since BHC,  bothered calling up an old post.

Updated to today.
In the real world. The top 12 coins on coinmarketcap.
#1 on CMK: Bitcoin is the only PoW coin
#2 on CMK: Ethereum is switching to PoS.
#3, #4, #5: Are Tokens
#6 on CMK :Cardano is already PoS.  
#7 on CMK: Ripple is neither.
#8 on CMK: BUSD is a token
#9 on CMK: Solana is a version of PoS
#10 on CMK: Dogecoin is switching to PoS
#11 on CMK: Polkadot is a version of PoS
#12 on CMK: WBTC is a token.

Only Bitcoin is still PoW, and only Bitcoin will be affected by any bans because of energy waste.
https://fortune.com/2022/01/05/crypto-blackouts-bitcoin-mining-bans-kosovo-iran-kazakhstan-iceland/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-15/crypto-mania-in-texas-risks-new-costs-and-strains-on-shaky-grid

Notice that there are no new PoW coins in the top 12, once bitcoin ends or evolves that is the final nail in the coffin of the PoW dead end tech.

The Tera Luna collapse is a good example , any crypto can crash to zero, look at all of the non-existent PoW coins that are no longer mentioned.
Thinking Bitcoin can't follow suit is a religious faith not a logical analysis.
But think what you like, just as some others think what they like, and time will prove whom is right.  
https://coinpedia.org/opinion/geopolitical-strategist-and-author-peter-zeihanpeter-zeihan-thinks-bitcoin-is-dumpster-fire/

It was quite predictable! A newbie mistake that people like LegendaryK make is to assume the 'Coinmarketcap rating' has always been the way it is now. You have to stick around for a few years to understand that projects like Terra Luna pop up, bring in a good amount of money, then due to insanely huge market caps make it into the top 10 and a short while later, crash to zero. Their place is immediately scooped up by the next scam and so it goes on.
That's why long-time Bitcoiners stop caring about these rankings; because while it seems like there are many coins 'on Bitcoin's heels', they're actually rather insignificant little pump-and-dump scams that come and go, without even getting close to something like rivaling Bitcoin.

This sub-10-minute video is mostly a joke, but it actually illustrates what I'm trying to say pretty well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHfJRON3b-w

The young man creates a company with 10 billion shares and sells a single one for 50£, while holding on to the rest of the shares, which on paper means his company is worth 500 billion British pounds. In most of these scamcoin projects, the founders sell a bunch of coins, but create insanely huge amounts of them - the number 21 million pales in comparison - which leads to humongous market capitalizations. Most of the coins remain in the hands of the founders, who drop them on the market as soon as the project gains some traction.

Bump.

This didn't age well.