Topic: Why btc cannot move pow to pos - page 2. (Read 903 times)

What is funny , is you still don't understand it.  

---

Exactly,
It is impossible for BTC to convert to PoS, because their is literally no one in charge to coordinate the change.
Which means when the US & Europe ban Proof of Waste, the only options are utter destruction of btc or becoming a token on a PoS network before the crash.
However, 4 mining pool operator control over 51% hashrate, 4 people colluding is centralized.
But the pool operators only centralize the transactions control, the code development is still rudderless.

---

You kind of just rambled.

So if a dummy buy an asic, he can mine BTC & Bitcoin Cash until the PoW bans take place.

But if an Investor buy a PoS coin, it can literally only stake that single coin.
Hate to break it to you the staking coin is more specialized than the mining asic. 

PoS coins don't waste energy, PoW coins do waste insane amounts of energy.
Energy that people could be using to heat/cool their homes, or use for cooking or refrigeration.
Energy that people need to survive and have a decent life.

As for Ethereum, by converting to PoS,
it is more secure, less energy-intensive, and better for implementing new scaling solutions compared to the previous proof-of-work architecture.
And here is a biggie for you,
Ethereum PoS is totally immune to the coming Proof of Waste Bans.

---

You know why all of these topics about converting BTC to PoS keep popping up.
The BTC masses are not as stupid as the BTC cult nutjobs,
a few of them are starting to realize , hey what happens to my btc once the US and Europe ban PoW mining. (They can see it coming.)

Some think, a quick conversion to PoS ,
and that can't happen due to the lack of leadership in btc development.
So thinking PoS is going to save BTC network is not going to happen.
Once the PoW Bans are enacted, there won't be 2 years to start the conversion, figure out what PoS code is required,
what change to make or not make to the reward system, whether or not to become deflationary by burning transaction fees.
The BTC community is literally incapable of a successful conversion.

So that only leaves wrapped tokens, which is already being used,
https://wbtc.network/

https://www.tronweekly.com/cardano-wrapped-bitcoin-boost-adoption/

The only other option will be to just let btc death spiral.

I don't think it is a good idea for Bitcoin to be moving to PoW mechanism...at least for now! Time will eventually tell which is the better option: PoS or PoW. We already know that in terms of security and decentralization, it is PoW that is the most reliable and this one of the many things that define Bitcoin so taking that away and you are left with just skeletons. Now, the biggest concern with PoW is, of course, the huge amount of power that it is using in the mining and confirmation process and zeroing on this aspect alone there is a growing movement to stop Bitcoin from further growing...as if doing so will stop climate change altogether. On my side, there are far more industries even unnecessary ones that are eating out a lot of power but they are allowed to be doing business so why make a big exception on Bitcoin?

Btc can move to PoS if the software is there and the majority of network aggree with it but i think its not going to PoS but the miner keep look a renewable energy to proof bitcoin is not that bad

how about this I used to believe in free speech until I read your thread topic.

now I believe in deletion of inappropriate topics such as yours.


If you could make the effort to prove me correct and explain why I think you are completely inappropriate to ask this question I would be impressed.

Proof of stake does not only make the network more centralized bht could also give the power of the network to a few users who hods the highest stake therr by making them controlled the network trasaction confirmations.

So ultimately bitcoin is not design to be controlled by a few user and bitcoin decentralization is what give bitcoin that power of being uncontrolled.
Bitcoin network hasrate have been touching all time high on several occasions, and Bitcoin miners are constantly looking for an improved and environmentally friendly energy supply that will aid more bitcoin morning efficiency such as Bitcoin mining green energy supplies so no need for proof of stake for bitcoin since there are alternatives to most of the contending issues facing Bitcoin proof of work algorithm.

Imagine who will do everything when you will move from POW to POS? Is there a team? It's not like a hard fork that anyone can do it. Will the community accept this migration? Can you shut down old chain miners who don't want to stop themselves? How will you control them? If miners continue mining then the old chain still will be live. Due to true decentralization, anyone can't move Bitcoin from POW to PoS? There will be many more questions definitely during the move. So it's quite impossible.

Because most new coins get their few months of hype and then they disappear never to be heard from again.  Mining is a commitment, because you often have to buy specialised hardware.  And not many people want to commit to fly-by-night crapcoins.  Otherwise you're investing in hardware just to be left with an expensive space-heater when the coin you're mining becomes worthless and all the mindless speculators have moved on.  Whereas Proof-of-Stake is ideally suited for flash-in-the-pan hype-fests which are totally lacking in substance and purpose, because you can just sell it and move on to the next pump'n'dump turd.

Good coins are more than the sum of their mechanisms.  They need to fulfill a purpose.  If people are actually going to use a coin, meaning it actually has a future, then you want Proof-of-Work and a strong hashrate to ensure those users can transact securely and safely, without interference from intermediaries and without centralised entities suddenly changing the supply rules or co-opting the network in other nefarious ways.  

If, however, a coin is some hollow, get-rich-quick scheme, where it doesn't matter whether the network is secure because most of it is going to be held on exchanges by speculators and no one is going to spend any of it (likely because it has no merchant adoption and no one could spend it even if they wanted to), then yeah, Proof-of-Stake is 100% the way to go.  

As for Ethereum, I suppose Proof-of-Stake is also a fallback for when you realise you've screwed your alignment of incentives, which is exactly what they did.  ETH tried to do too much and their infrastructure simply couldn't handle it.  I guarantee you they wouldn't be doing this if they had any other choice.  'Plan A' with the DAO didn't pan out a few years back, so ETH and ETC split.  And now 'Plan B' has failed too, so this is either 'Plan C' or perhaps even one of the later letters.  It's possible I've lost count of the comedy of errors.  They're in damage-limitation mode and trying to spin it as a positive.  But anyone with any sense recognises it's another failure.  

Actually that's what he says, not what he thinks. Never forget that tiny detail.
And, unfortunately for ETH, the reality is already showing how badly centralized it is.


And still the altcoins are cheaper than Bitcoin. Wonder why...
Bitcoin doesn't afford to make experiments that can easily lead to mistakes. This doesn't make it flawed.
If you consider the new centralized ETH or BNB chains so much better, why don't you just remain at your bank account? Just because of its name?

Aw many of my dear fellows explained this to you that Bitcoin is considered as the real Decentralized Currency and people not even consider is Decentralized on the same page they consider Bitcoin as real Stpre of Value. A pure asset which protect their privacy and their rights for the financial freedom so this is not even possible to move Bitcoin to the POS as what makes Bitcoin the King is POW.

I'm obviously questioning that part, and I've been questioning it since your stay here. I have also been questioning the centralization part. We all have been. Counter-arguments have been submitted. You're stuck at ad hominem.

Says the person who doesn't understand the essence of running a node. 

Actually.
 

https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pos/


How you can support PoW centralized 4 person pool operators dominated security, is a flaw in reasoning,
but seeing as how you are a btc cult member most of your thinking about crypto is flawed.  

Every altcoin in existence has a higher onchain transaction capacity and greater ability to scale onchain than btc flawed PoW design.
But ignoring that is your strong suit. 

Because they're waste themselves. 

Oh yeah the energy problem, it’s good way to market bitcoin actually. At least for searching the energy consumption peeps are searching bitcoin on the Google and Once they realise it’s nothing as compared to the worlds energy consumption they would definitely go and buy it. Far cheaper than printing money in a press, hiring world class security to protect it and yet getting robbed now and then. Paying salaries to press runners and what not.

Definitely Bitcoin is working on PoW because that’s what Mr. Satoshi dreamed about and had all 360 thoughts while developing blockchain.

PoS came in afterwards when they thought about new business line. Funny.

Bitcoin PoW requires working hard to earn reward rather than requiring money. A PoW consensus mechanism requires you to solve puzzles and get rewarded once the work is done.. But PoS says you just need to prove you own hugh amount of money to get a job and earn rewards. It's a very corrupt system... The kind of corruption we see in "third world countries"

Hardwork requires alot of energy. The important thing is to make sure that much of the energy is going into solving problems rather than getting wasted in any form. If most/all of the energy is used to solve problems then there will be no need to consume more electricity from nuclear power plant (for example) to solve the problems the mining hardware has solved. The miners are supposed to use energy efficiently to prevent waste of energy that should be used in solving problems like heating homes during winter.

It is akin to saying that we need governments with armed people to protect honest people from violence: it works (maybe) until your "protector" decides to use weapons against those honest law-abiding persons. Who will guard against a centralized body that has access to your funds, and who can dictate what to do? If they can cut hackers off the system and return stolen money, they also can take out money from people who never thought that they are going to be deemed criminals in the future. Proof-of-stake is the quintessence of a permissioned financial system in which it is elite groups of wealthy stakers who can and will decide the fate of less successful participants and who, in turn, is going to be controlled directly by powerful representatives of the system for which bitcoin has been created to be an alternative.

I see many people are saying why bitcoin won't move from pow to pos they mostly ask because they think pow will consume some energy and its not good for the environment while in pos you won't need to consume any energy for mining bitcoin while pos is way more centralised comparing to pow and this can be manipulated much easier

The reason why Bitcoin will move from POW to POS is for it to maintain its credibility. Some naive people will always say POS is more decentralized and secure but in reality, POS are centralized though it may be secure an example is what Binance did to stop some fund stolen by a hacker on their Binance Smart Chain network this year.

The issue about BTC mining electricity use are full of misinformation just to manipulate the mining of BTC but there is a lot of BTC enthusiast organization that is working on the use of green energy.

Peer reviewed and individual verification of system design outweighs hermeneutic interpretation of secondary mass media sources that have no background in the field.

Stop being lazy and start doing the former. Maybe it will help you combat your constant fear and you’ll actually start to understand how to process information wisely.

The investment of time, money and the electrical energy is one of the pillars that add real value to the coin.

I could give a rats ass what some politician or wannabe tree hugger thinks. Idiots always collude in mass. They don't give two shits about enviro, just power and control, period.

Said the Proof-of-Stake cultist.  

And what you're too myopic and limited in brain capacity to realise, is that, even if mining bans do come, it would merely increase decentralisation.  Large ASIC farms would not be able to operate because they would be shut down by authorities.  But smaller mining operations would be more difficult to notice.  People are mining in China right now, despite it being banned.  All they have to do is remain small enough to stay off the radar.  

Bitcoin's network is battle-hardened and resilient.  It can adapt.  I have zero concerns about world governments and what they think they can achieve.  I guarantee you we are more determined than they are.  We can react faster than any democratic government because we aren't bogged down by debates and votes, or waiting for bills to pass.  We're always going to be several steps ahead.  

And decentralisation isn't the only factor.  This is about security as well.  Even if Bitcoin's present hashrate was cut by 75%, it would still be more secure than any weak-ass PoS trash.