Topic: Proof of stake is bad and why bitcoin is the only crypto I would trust - page 2. (Read 329 times)

I can't remember the original argument I'd ever heard but it went along the lines of "what's to stake if there really isn't anything to stake?" and that hit home for me. When you behave badly on Bitcoin, or you want to continue mining on a fork (accidental or deliberate) you risk everything from a financial perspective. It simply costs too much to mine on a fork, you'll always want to mine on the winning chain.

PoS? You can mine on 100 forks, it costs you nothing. Nothing is at stake.

Why nobody talks about energy consumption for PoW or PoS doesn't matter, because the oil lobbyist is using it to cover the energy left in the atmosphere (oil, gas....). Of course, this is not the only reason but it is a good reason.

One of the main reasons it's very bad is that unlike Bitcoin PoW you can't be part of full network consensus if you don't have alot of  money or the required amount of money (which most participants typically can't afford) ... Better still, you can't take part in proper Governance and/or Consensus if you don't have alot of money, and this kind of make power reside in the hands of few like your number 4 point suggest. That is the typical corruption you see in third world countries... The kind of 3rd world corruption that force the subjects to rise up against ruling elites who allowed or invented such corrupt way of governance.


In regards to your number 3 point, solving problems or generating money/value requires energy, but PoS people don't seem to like that too much. They seem to want a system that make them alot of money without working hard or consuming the amount of energy that is needed to make the money. They can't escape this unless they build devices that use energy efficiently without compromising on hardwork

If only these people didn't create their own coins and just continue to use bitcoins and support it or make some development to improve its transactions, we would have not suffered any losses in the market but the way they counter the popularity and the spread of its implementation, they create huge numbers of altcoins which ruin the idea why bitcoin has been created and now their true motive has appeared and they only added problem than working solutions to counter the bank's manipulations of our money. If only Satoshi Nakamoto showed himself and clarify all the doubts pertaining to the control of bitcoins, it could change the course of crypto history and I'm pretty sure it will be a good result if he really intends it and he is truthful about what he says in his whitepaper.

Well I liked ethereum a lot better when it was using PoW. It's pretty hard to talk about PoS without mentioning ethereum since it is the biggest crypto that uses PoS. I think most people are thinking PoS must be better just because it seems to be the latest technology that improves upon the older protocol but without really understanding the drawbacks.

Proof of stake does have some advantages such as energy use. Yes it uses a lot less energy than proof of work, but so do bicycles.
But does that mean we should all stop driving our cars and just ride around in bicycles?


Not familiar with that problem. Interesting.


This is a huge one and this alone should tell you all you need to know about ethereum PoS--it is pure garbage.


Seems not a day went by in recent years where you didn't hear about another ethereum smart contract getting hacked and drained of its funds.
Smart contracts should be called dumb contracts because they have been nothing but a security nightmare.

Your arguments are not directed at PoS, they are directed at Ethereum, and they are not good enough to convince an Ethereum fan who has some understanding of crypto protocols.

If you want to attack PoS, you could point out that it has the unsolved and maybe unsolvable "nothing at stake problem", which means that it's cheaper to attack PoS blockchains than PoW blockchains. Plus there's a lot of other problems, like encouraging people to store their money in pools, which means trust.

And if you want to attack Eth, you can point out that its ecosystem is useless, it doesn't have any solutions for real life, it's all about creating and swapping worthless tokens that have no utility. Originally ETH was promising that people would be selling goods and services through smart contracts, and this promise never materialized, because a) it has too many downsides and b) people are fine with how things are.

No did you?


Uh yes I have done a lot of research which leads me to conclude my opinion that proof of stake is garbage. It seems you cannot counter my statements so you resort to personal attacks. Which just proves my point. If you feel otherwise then you have to provide some credible reasons to support your position instead of personal attacks which to me is a sign of your desperation.

Did you experience something recently to hate and make it your mission to defame ETH?

I hope you have researched a lot to back your claim because, from what I see, you are hurt and probably invested a lot in a project that makes you hate the technology but not the people who have planned the scams, etc.

That is PoS, what I know more about it is that it is centralized, unlike PoW. But if you want to know more about PoW versus PoS, you can read the difference from this thread:

[Megathread] The long-known PoW vs. PoS debate

PoS is also a means crypto is moving more towards ways the government will find it easier to have more control.

Another thing I believe is very bad about Proof of Stake...is the staking.

You are giving up your private keys to stake your coins to a staking pool that you have to trust to give your keys back when you want to unstake. So much for self custody. Why anyone would want to stake ethereum is beyond me, especially after the collapse of companies like Blockfi and Celsius where customers lost millions worth of their staked funds. I would not be able to sleep at night with my funds staked in such a way. Not your keys not your coins. This just totally goes against the concept of decentralization IMO.

It may be possible to stake ethereum without using a staking pool and keep your private keys but from what I understand this is very difficult, and beyond the technical ability of the average person.



That may be true but as a long term investment I would not feel comfortable having my funds in anything other than bitcoin at this point. After the collapse of  FTX and others it appears much stronger regulations are on the way soon in the US that would officially classify ethereum and most every other altcoin as a security. Which could then likely cause the price of eth to drop like a stone. Proof of stake is still a new and unproven concept and I do not want to be the guinea pig to see how it plays out in the future.

Can you backup your claim with some verified statistical data?
When if comes to crypto scams, the blockchain doesn't matter. Crypto scams can exist in a proof-of-stake environment as well as a proof-of-work environment. What matters the most for all scams is how the scammer would deceive a bunch of naive people to trust him and put their money in a fake project.
Anyway, there's no need to praise PoF and shit on PoS. There have been hundreds of posts around the forum about this topic and I don't think that you are adding anything new to the conversation. Time will tell whether or not Proof-of-Stake has a future in the crypto world.

1. I don't think that's entirely accurate. Just like Bitcoin's PoW, Ethereum has a fixed reward per block and a target block time. On average over a long period of time, it should hit these averages.
2. Bad actors using/building on a non-restricted blockchain doesn't necessarily mean that the mainnet blockchain itself is a scam.
3. No argument on unregistered securities. Though just because it takes no effort to generate coins, doesn't mean that it's not economically sound in the long term. Time will tell!
4. Well, you don't know that for sure. Miners have a lot of power and to say that they are a large and distributed group of people at this point would be quite naive. Maybe there are more groups and it doesn't come under one group or founder, but I definitely would not say that "elitisim" doesn't exist in Bitcoin.

Proof of Stake is another consensus method. It's not terrible in the way Ethereum has implemented it, time will tell if it can keep up with Bitcoin though.

So what?? Majority of the financial scams and hacking incidents involve bitcoin. Does it matter? It's a very wrong statement and unrelated to the subject of the thread.

POS is definitely more centralized in nature than POW coins. Also POW coins have a production cost unlike POS coins. But that doesn't make ETH look bad. It is a steller performer since the day it was launched.

If you don't trust ETH, that's fine! But ETH is equally a great investment like bitcoin.

I need to disagree

If proof of stake has greater scalability, faster operations and cheap, we wouldn't see any people keep complaining about ETH transaction is slow and the fees is high. There's no improvement from Vitalik Butterin to solve the scalability issue, they're not creating a second layer and other thing. He seems to be agree if ETH is using the other centralized network e.g. BSC, polygon etc that can't be controlled by them.

Any crypto is flexible because it can be transferred to any address regardless which city or country of the holder is.

Talking about energy efficient doesn't really that important since any business will use energy, the bigger the business/project = the bigger the energy consumption.

Proof of stake has its own advantages too like greater scalibility, flexibility, faster operations, cheap, energy efficient, etc.
Its good that we got eth on PoS and btc on PoW.
Let the users decide what they want to be on. Everyone got freedom to choose between the two.

---

What are you talking about ? ETH has merged to PoS only a few months ago late 2022 (around September 2022 IIRC). Before that eth was on PoW, your point is baseless with one-sided opinion.

In short, centralized assets will never be more secure than decentralized assets. If you enter the market looking for a coin to use, multifunctional, safe, secure, and not controlled by anyone, then bitcoin is a perfect choice. But if you are here to invest for profit, invest in any coin you think can give you profit. ETH is not as secure as bitcoin, but those who invested in it early have also received returns that are not inferior to bitcoin, and in recent years, ETH has provided a better ROI than bitcoin. The decision is up to each person and depends on each person's needs. Let's wait and see next bull season, which coin offers better returns.

Why I think proof of stake is bad and bitcoin is the only true decentralized crypto. Everything else is a scam as we have seen with so many major altcoins imploding over the years. Anyone else agree?

1. Proof of stake tokens such as ethereum can be generated out of thin air in unlimited amounts. The creators can give themselves as much as they want and dump it onto the market whenever they want. Proof of stake is no better than the fiat money system where money can be printed by the central bank in unlimited amounts.

2. As we have seen over the years maybe 90 to 95% of crytpo scams have been perpetrated on the ethereum blockchain.

3. That is why proof of work is so much better. It takes a lot of work and effort to mine the bitcoins. Bitcoin cannot be simply generated out of thin air like ethereum and other sh*tcoins. Ethereum and 99% of altcoins are unregistered securities. The SEC and CFTC have both stated bitcoin is the only digital asset recognized as a commodity in the United States. Everything else are unregistered securities.

4. Bitcoin is the only crypto I can think of that doesn't have a leader or small group of people controlling it, which makes bitcoin perhaps the only digital asset that is really trustless. Ethereum has Vitalik Buterin, Cardano has Charles Hoskinson, Terra Luna had Do Kwon, etc. You have to trust that these people will not one day decide to steal all your money and run.

There are probably many other reasons why I believe proof of stake is terrible but these are a few I can think of right now.