Indeed, that's why I work on these systems. But back to your assertion: "stake" needs to be acquired by buying the tokens, and therefore requires energy expenditure, invalidating your argument.
-
-
Replying to @el33th4xor @hugohanoi
It is true that buying stake implies energy expenditure (trading wealth for stake). However once you've bought a stake increasing it requires 0 additional energy expenditure. That's the difference. "The censor cannot be unseated because he has acquired majority stake"
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @SGBarbour @el33th4xor
Not quite,
@el33th4xor is still wrong. Staking *itself* requires little to no energy expenditure. Emin is confusing the creation of value (internally) from the *transfer* of value.2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @hugohanoi @SGBarbour
You're just repeating the "labor theory of value" now, a thoroughly debunked idea, even though you walked away from it earlier. If you believe that wasting energy in coin production brings value, you must explain why the Baht is with less than USD.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @el33th4xor @SGBarbour
Hugo Nguyen Retweeted Hugo Nguyen
And you keep repeating your argument without considering the other half of the equation, un-forgeability. Did I bring up the Labor theory of value?https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/1046105642870681600 …
Hugo Nguyen added,
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @hugohanoi @SGBarbour
Yes, you did :-). Without mentioning its name. Bear with me for a couple of tweets and I'll try to clarify some myths.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Bitcoin's unforgeability isn't rooted in energy spent on coin production. That's a common myth.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
True, an external attacker who wants to change the record needs to buy 51% of hashpower. Another way to phrase it is that he needs to "stake hardware". That's what pow is, a specific form of stake, currently at the vagaries of ASIC manufacturers.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
The energy spent on coin production is purely wasted, it provides no price floor for coins, it is value leaked out of the system. Much like how the high cost of printing Bahts doesn't guarantee value higher than USD. It's just the cost of competition between miners.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
The immutability of the Bitcoin blockchain stems from the unwillingness of a majority of miners to adopt an alternative chain. This has nothing to do with the ongoing costs of minting, which are purely opex. (Remember, the initial hardware was capex.)
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Hugo Nguyen Retweeted Hugo Nguyen
Nope, the immutability of the Bitcoin blockchain stems from the large cost barrier that is a combination of stock & flow. Categorizing energy cost per block as pure waste shows that you don't understand stock & flow.https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/1046144055820804096 …
Hugo Nguyen added,
-
-
Replying to @hugohanoi @SGBarbour
You seem unable to go for two tweets without trying to fling an insult.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
