Proof of stake mining of bicoin - page 6.

baby222

hero member

Activity: 1008

Merit: 501

Quote from: achimsmile on December 29, 2014, 05:40:01 AM

Quote from: johnyj on December 26, 2014, 01:59:48 PM

POS=no production cost=no value

If I can produce a coin without any cost, why should I pay any thing valuable to exchange it??? I will just go ahead to mine it

Fiat money can have value without production cost, because there is a law to force its circulation, and the cost to make that law can be a war, which costs millions of times more energy than POW mining

You make a common mistake here.

PoS has a production cost. To invent a working PoS system, you need to do brainwork. To generate a PoS block, you need to do CPU cycles (and you need to have stake of course).

But that doesn't matter, because production cost != value

The amount of CPU power necessary to generate a PoS block is nominal at most. A single very old computer would be able to handle creating every single block of a PoS coin.

If it does not cost anything to produce a PoS coin then it does not cost anything to attack the network. As a result any PoS coin can be attacked for free

kokojie

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1003

Quote from: inBitweTrust on December 29, 2014, 05:39:57 PM

Quote from: LeChatNoir on December 29, 2014, 04:06:39 PM

In the end the truth is bitcoin is consuming 10% of its market cap each year (500 million $) to mantain a decentralized (not so decentralized lately) ledger.

10% a year today, 6 % in 2016, 5% in 2017, 3% in 2019, and 0.5% in 2026.

Quote from: LeChatNoir on December 29, 2014, 04:06:39 PM

you can just buy all the NXT you can for the current extra cheap price, sit on them and enjoy all the benefits of a natural steady deflation which increases your purchasing power. Cool

That something I like about Nxt. Bitcoin is Disinflationary, while nxt has no inflation besides the ICO. This may be its undoing though because distribution wasn't the best initially. The nxt currency isn't deflationary in of itself .... are there any true deflationary currencies in existence? (I am not talking about deflationary in reference to minting vs adoption)

The 10% will not decrease, as shown by the last halving. If it decreased to 0.5% in 2026, then it will only cost 0.5% to attack the Bitcoin network, which is laughable as security.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

One interesting thing about PoS, is that the only known way
around the nothing-at-stake problem is to use bonds (security
deposits). However, this seems to further exacerbate the
wealth centralization issue, as now you need to not only
be a stake holder, but one that has enough capital to
continually post bonds every block. Maybe its not a huge
deal?

inBitweTrust

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 501

Quote from: LeChatNoir on December 29, 2014, 04:06:39 PM

In the end the truth is bitcoin is consuming 10% of its market cap each year (500 million $) to mantain a decentralized (not so decentralized lately) ledger.

10% a year today, 6 % in 2016, 5% in 2017, 3% in 2019, and 0.5% in 2026.

Quote from: LeChatNoir on December 29, 2014, 04:06:39 PM

you can just buy all the NXT you can for the current extra cheap price, sit on them and enjoy all the benefits of a natural steady deflation which increases your purchasing power. Cool

That something I like about Nxt. Bitcoin is Disinflationary, while nxt has no inflation besides the ICO. This may be its undoing though because distribution wasn't the best initially. The nxt currency isn't deflationary in of itself .... are there any true deflationary currencies in existence? (I am not talking about deflationary in reference to minting vs adoption)

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: johnyj on December 29, 2014, 04:48:02 PM

Then that cost will decide its value. For PoS coins' value to rise, the mining cost must go up, and eventually it will be as energy hugry as PoW coin

If people can both mine coins and buy coins, they will always select the cheapest method to get coins (provided coins have some use). So eventually the mining will become so energy consuming that it costs almost the same as coin's market price, which makes PoS coin the same as PoW coin. Actually I don't think you can design a scheme to overcome this basic market behavior, unless you can make a law to force people to use PoS coins

Well sort of. A coin's value is determined by supply and demand, not the mining costs; it is the mining costs that are determined by the value of the new coins being issued..

PoS coins like NXT have essentially no mining (minting) costs because they issue no new coins.

cryptogeeknext

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Bitcoin trolls back

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on December 29, 2014, 01:34:14 PM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 01:10:15 PM

You should watch Hunger Games, it's one heck of a movie, that's the asymptote I refer to.

Is the sci-fi movie the only thing that backs your words?

No, I'm just saying that trying to furk bicoin might result in bi-furk-action.
So, bi careful and don't furk it up! Cheesy

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Quote from: Q7 on December 29, 2014, 07:00:17 AM

Quote from: johnyj on December 26, 2014, 01:59:48 PM

POS=no production cost=no value

If I can produce a coin without any cost, why should I pay any thing valuable to exchange it??? I will just go ahead to mine it

Fiat money can have value without production cost, because there is a law to force its circulation, and the cost to make that law can be a war, which costs millions of times more energy than POW mining

Pos concept still needs electricity to keep the computer on for a certain time period before the reward comes. There are certain systems that dictates at least minimum 2 hours so there is still some cost of production attached to here

Then that cost will decide its value. For PoS coins' value to rise, the mining cost must go up, and eventually it will be as energy hugry as PoW coin

If people can both mine coins and buy coins, they will always select the cheapest method to get coins (provided coins have some use). So eventually the mining will become so energy consuming that it costs almost the same as coin's market price, which makes PoS coin the same as PoW coin. Actually I don't think you can design a scheme to overcome this basic market behavior, unless you can make a law to force people to use PoS coins

And the concept of "stake holder" is so legacy: This concept typically coming from a very centralized organization in old times. With concentrated power comes more corruption and political unease, they are all against the idea of decentralized consensus spirit of bitcoin. Satoshi invented bitcoin to be a different alternative to legacy financial system. However, PoS designer walk the same path of legacy financial system, they even use the concept of interest to simulate the existing financial system, all these sounds very outdated and not well thought

LeChatNoir

hero member

Activity: 699

Merit: 501

Coinpanion.io - Copy Successful Crypto Traders

Another 15 pages of POW vs POS debate, such WOW! Grin

In the end the truth is bitcoin is consuming 10% of its market cap each year (500 million $) to mantain a decentralized (not so decentralized lately) ledger.
That means if you have 100k $ of wealth in bitcoin you need to pray that the USA government don't change its mind about bitcoin while you work hard to earn at least 10k $ per year if you do not want to lose purchasing power. Undecided

Or...
you can just buy all the NXT you can for the current extra cheap price, sit on them and enjoy all the benefits of a natural steady deflation which increases your purchasing power. Cool

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1010

Newbie

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on December 29, 2014, 02:28:31 PM

But, even if we can lower security cost, the question
remains if PoS is a fair system, as it tends to "ossify nobility"
as Vitalik would say, and makes the rich richer, eventually
culminating in the hunger games

It's becoming quite popular to compare movies to coins. Let's talk about Bitcoin and Snowpiercer. Guess who play the miner roles...

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: achimsmile on December 29, 2014, 11:02:06 AM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:53:16 AM

Improvements in PoW come in a form of advancements in energy-efficient computation

You mean improve on how to waste energy more efficiently?

I think he means greater actual security with the same security cost.

People keep making the claim that PoS offers lower cost.
This is only true (as far as I know) if the currency issuance
is lower, due to competition.

But, even if we can lower security cost, the question
remains if PoS is a fair system, as it tends to "ossify nobility"
as Vitalik would say, and makes the rich richer, eventually
culminating in the hunger games

It may be true PoS offers some higher security though,
which is why I'd be interested in this:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake#Meni.27s_implementation

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1010

Newbie

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 01:10:15 PM

You should watch Hunger Games, it's one heck of a movie, that's the asymptote I refer to.

Is the sci-fi movie the only thing that backs your words?

siameze

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 01:10:15 PM

Quote from: siameze on December 29, 2014, 12:44:58 PM

I wonder how much energy has been wasted in this circlejerk of a thread.

You're probably saying that we've had a lot of fun here.
I don't know about you, but I'm mining the heck out of JoyCoin:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/joycoin-will-take-over-the-world-mining-begins-now-905184

I was indeed saying that, and I made extra popcorn. I enjoy all this fun.

Hope JoyCoin is being good to you. I haven't heard of it but will check out the thread you posted later.

cryptogeeknext

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Bitcoin trolls back

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on December 29, 2014, 11:19:51 AM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:53:16 AM

This is what separates PoW from PoS. It is much more dynamic system without obvious asymptotes of power saturation.

Obvious? I'm not sure that such an asymptote even exists. Provide more info, pease.

You should watch Hunger Games, it's one heck of a movie, that's the asymptote I refer to.

Quote from: yumei on December 29, 2014, 12:40:16 PM

Centralization remains an issue

That's why PoW provides a 51% mechanism.
It works both ways, any 51% attack can be 51% attacked.

Quote from: siameze on December 29, 2014, 12:44:58 PM

I wonder how much energy has been wasted in this circlejerk of a thread.

You're probably saying that we've had a lot of fun here.
I don't know about you, but I'm mining the heck out of JoyCoin:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/joycoin-will-take-over-the-world-mining-begins-now-905184

siameze

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 11:13:15 AM

Quote from: achimsmile on December 29, 2014, 11:02:06 AM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:53:16 AM

Improvements in PoW come in a form of advancements in energy-efficient computation

You mean improve on how to waste energy more efficiently?

Energy cannot be wasted, just transformed.
Do you play computer games, do you watch tv, engage in sports maybe?

Do you realize how much energy humanity 'wastes' by simply existing?
Yeah, the whole Universe is just an utter waste of energy, this needs to stop, teh Big Crunch will save us Cheesy

I wonder how much energy has been wasted in this circlejerk of a thread.

yumei

full member

Activity: 185

Merit: 100

Even bigger asic mining company CEO being truthful about what is happening actually.

MegaBigPower’s CEO Dave Carlson about centralization with asic bitcoin mining:

Centralization remains an issue

The rise of the ASIC and the profitability shifts for mine operators has resulted in what can only be called the death of the retail bitcoin miner, according to Carlson.

“The market for retail miners has all but disappeared,” he explained. “The amount of power required to make a relevant amount of bitcoin has pretty much just left the larger operators who can run at scale using cheap power.”

Calling large mining pools a "direct threat to bitcoin’s future", Carlson said that the community should be as much against the existence of several large mining entities as they are about one huge one.

He said:

“Each and every investor, owner, entrepreneur or bitcoin enthusiast should be concerned that having two large pools and one 'Unknown' does not ensure the healthy future of the bitcoin ecosystem.”

Source: http://www.coindesk.com/megabigpower-2014-game-changer-bitcoin-mining/

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1010

Newbie

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:53:16 AM

This is what separates PoW from PoS. It is much more dynamic system without obvious asymptotes of power saturation.

Obvious? I'm not sure that such an asymptote even exists. Provide more info, pease.

cryptogeeknext

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Bitcoin trolls back

Quote from: achimsmile on December 29, 2014, 11:02:06 AM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:53:16 AM

Improvements in PoW come in a form of advancements in energy-efficient computation

You mean improve on how to waste energy more efficiently?

Energy cannot be wasted, just transformed.
Do you play computer games, do you watch tv, engage in sports maybe?

Do you realize how much energy humanity 'wastes' by simply existing?
Yeah, the whole Universe is just an utter waste of energy, this needs to stop, teh Big Crunch will save us Cheesy

achimsmile

legendary

Activity: 1225

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:53:16 AM

Improvements in PoW come in a form of advancements in energy-efficient computation

You mean improve on how to waste energy more efficiently?

cryptogeeknext

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Bitcoin trolls back

Quote from: sumantso on December 29, 2014, 10:38:58 AM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:36:44 AM

Quote from: sumantso on December 29, 2014, 10:27:38 AM

Like it or not, some variation of PoS is going to dominate. The general opinion is slowly being aware that the money given over to the electricity and the hardware companies is better off being utilized to develop the coin itself.

No one is forced to give any money to anyone, people exercise their own choices.
Competition requires energy, no-competition doesn't.

So which of the competition is better suited - the one which is spending resources to keep the network running, or the other which is using the same resources in improving itself?

We might have a different definitions of improving.

Improvements in PoW come in a form of advancements in energy-efficient computation, new types of power sources and research of cryptographic hash functions. These improvements are tangible and can be applied to other areas of human life.

Improvements in PoS only benefit the few in power as any innovation will be privatized and used to further strengthen the control grid.

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on December 29, 2014, 10:39:29 AM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:23:41 AM

So you equate PoS cryptocoins to dollars...

No, I could use BTC instead of USD.

In BTC large coin holders need to decide what percentage of their wealth they will keep in coins and what they reinvest in mining so that competition for control keeps the system robust.

Investing the whole stake is risky as mining farms can burn or become obsolete as new tech emerges, so some balance need to be sought. This is what separates PoW from PoS. It is much more dynamic system without obvious asymptotes of power saturation. It is possible of course that PoS system stays robust and honest for a long time without spending any energy, but it's better to have alternatives where competition is more welcome. PoW provides that.

sumantso

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1000

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on December 29, 2014, 10:48:56 AM

Quote from: sumantso on December 29, 2014, 10:47:52 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on December 29, 2014, 10:45:19 AM

Quote from: sumantso on December 29, 2014, 10:38:58 AM

Quote from: cryptogeeknext on December 29, 2014, 10:36:44 AM

Quote from: sumantso on December 29, 2014, 10:27:38 AM

Like it or not, some variation of PoS is going to dominate. The general opinion is slowly being aware that the money given over to the electricity and the hardware companies is better off being utilized to develop the coin itself.

No one is forced to give any money to anyone, people exercise their own choices.
Competition requires energy, no-competition doesn't.

So which of the competition is better suited - the one which is spending resources to keep the network running, or the other which is using the same resources in improving itself?

Again, confusing security model with distribution model.

Security costs depend on distribution rewards (issuance of new coins),
not whether the coin uses PoS or PoW.

You can buy miners and spend electricity and earn coins.
You can go to an exchange, spend money and buy coins.

Not really sure your point. Mine is that cryptos like NXT can claim lower security cost because they aren't issuing new currency. Very simple.

I doubt thats what NXT is claiming, though I can't attest to that. I was thinking more is terms of the Bitshares model where new coins are generated by elected delegates and awarded to all those working to develop and improve the coin.

Topic: Proof of stake mining of bicoin - page 6. (Read 25670 times)