An apt summary of most if not all of non-PoW protocols: "we solve distributed consensus on X by assuming we have solved distributed consensus on Y." In the process you'd get fancy terms like "randomness beacon" that sounds sophisticated, but in reality just obfuscates the issue.https://twitter.com/random_walker/status/1043613473974964224 …
-
-
It's surely intimidating if you're new to crypto. All these smart-sounding people writing all these smart-sounding words. Their papers so thick, their formulas so fancy. They can't be all wrong, right? Some of this is due to pure incompetence, but some are outright scammy.
Show this thread -
The crypto scene of today must have been very similar to the early days of science, when people still believed in Perpetual Motion and the idea of getting something out of nothing. One day we will look back and laugh at all this insanity.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I am constantly befuddled that everyone doesn't realize PoS is circular exactly as you describe. It's simply a logical error to think that you can somehow "fix" circular arguments.
-
Maybe it's because Bitcoin itself has a certain circularity...BTC is valuable b/c it's secure b/c PoW is trustless b/c of incentives which only exist b/c BTC is valuable... But a virtuous cycle is a different circularity than begging the question.
-
yeah I wouldn’t call that circular reasoning, that’s just positive feedback loop.
-
How is PoS different in your mind?
-
Or rephrased, can you be more specific in your criticism of circularity?
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

